SO tired of women/girls being held accountable for mens failings...

[differentnameforthis]

This is not a TAAT, but it is because of a recent thread, and some concerning behaviour that I have been seeing recently.

Am I the only one who is so tired of having to explain that a man doesn't have a right to touch a woman against her wishes. That even if she refuses sex, or can't have sex, for whatever reason, he doesn't have a right to take it, just because he 'might be frustrated" or "you are married"

I just seem to keep repeating it again & again....which saddens me on a site that is predominantly frequented by women.

A man/husband/boyfriend/partner doesn't have the right to touch any woman in a sexual way when she has been clear that sex is currently off the table. Or has said NO

He doesn't have a right to film her sleeping, while he touches her/himself

And that if he does do any of this to her, and she sees it as assault, then it IS assault. And she is allowed to feel violated.

That just because you (general you) like to be touched in a certain way, or woken up with sexual touching, or whatever, it doesn't mean that everyone has to accept it.

She doesn't have to "talk to him" about his feelings, if she has already done so & if he is aware of what is going on.

Or the most recent one that I have been seeing a lot of (not just on here) "there are 2 sides to every story"

Can we just support the woman who is asking for advice based on her feelings/words that she has posted? Can we not call her a troll (the troll hunting on a recent thread was awful), can we not insinuate that she is lying by saying that there are 2 side to the story, can we not tell her that she is being dramatic, or ridiculous?

Please?

Sadly some of it is a generational thing. Some (not all) older women tend to side with the man i.e men not being able to control themselves and so on as its what they were taught when they were younger. How old do you mean? What's your evidence?

iminshock

""The relationships crowd "
I can't believe I just read that"

Really? That's the most shocking thing you've read on this thread?! Not the fact that MN is rife with rape apologists?!

What's wrong with referring to the Relationships crowd, then? Do enlighten me
Or don't, there are more interesting debates to have on this thread.

derxa

I'm 41 and in my social group I'm considered to be quite a radical feminist because I don't think like that. I am slowly educating...

My mother is in her early 60s. She is very much of this opinion. When someone tried to rape me, she told me that it was my fault for being out in the evening. I was 17.

She thinks that men who have sex with underage girls do so because the girls seduce them/the girls look older/the girls are after something.

Stillawake. Yes in a nutshell that's what I was trying to say.

My mum is about the same age as you, StillAwake, when I used to get groped when walking home from school (in uniform), she said it was because of my boobs and that I should just ignore it.

I had a breast-reduction at 15 because of this and she still has the same opinions, ie. it's always either the woman's fault or the woman's responsibility.

Sorry, yours, not you

My mother is in her early 60s. She is very much of this opinion. When someone tried to rape me, she told me that it was my fault for being out in the evening. I was 17. Bloody hell, that's terrible. I'm 56 and don't hold these views. Do many 60 somethings nowadays?
On the other hand I don't believe that all men are potential rapists and all women are victims.

"On the other hand I don't believe that all men are potential rapists and all women are victims."

Who thinks/says that all women are victims? Strange thing to say. Potential victims yes but actual victims, no.

As for "all men are potential rapists"... I think the point is that although all men are obviously not rapists, it's very difficult if not impossible to tell who is and who isn't... So it's safer to assume that a man could be a rapist. I think that's the logic, anyway.

Men have no right to a woman's body - that is simply non negotiable.

The problem arises where a 'reasonable expectation' of sex is implied in a marriage or long term relationship and the woman unilaterally withdraws or significantly curtails the sexual part of the relationship that was previously enjoyed.

This is not a black and white issue. Of course any woman (or man) has the right to decide they don't want sex at all for any reason.

However, in that case I don't think it is unreasonable for the man to feel very unhappy, strongly express that unhappiness, ask the woman to change her mind, and seek a mutually agreed way to bring the relationship back to what it was. If that doesn't happen or a reasonable explanation given (e illness) then he has the right to lay out the consequences which is that the relationship end or he be allowed an open relationship.

Where I disagree with the 'relationship crowd' is that too often the general tone is the man has no rights at all and even voicing his unhappiness or setting out the consequences is immediately labelled as coercion. In particular, having given birth to a child does not give you a woman a golden ticket to ignore and belittle his feelings and demand he never mentions sex again unless and until she has given her express permission over whatever timescale she deems.

All of the above applies equally the other way round where a man unilaterally withdraws sex from a relationship.

Thanks for clarifying, Lying. I nearly went away for a little cry... But it is terrible.

My mother joined a divorced and separated club after she divorced my dad for adultery. She believed the sob story of every single man there and felt very strongly that women were responsible for the breakdown of marriages too. In the sense that when men behaved badly, the women had driven them to it. It didn't apply to her of course. She blamed me for my dad cheating (long story).

I don't know whether it's a widespread belief, derxa. The women in my social group are all intelligent and educated women, yet they have been slow to change their position on this, and I have argued long and hard with them about it. Some of them still haven't changed their position, some of them have but still think caveats apply, and some can't believe they ever thought that way.

I do have male and female friends of the same age who don't hold this opinion, so it's certainly not everyone.

But my son is in 6th form. We have had some very indepth and detailed conversations on this matter because of ideas he brought home from school (e.g. if a girl is raped when she is drunk, then she has to at least take some responsibility). One conversation later and he now challenges boys and girls at school who express these views. It's certainly not just the older generations. Sadly.

My parents are mid sixties and they think it's a woman's fault if she gets raped. It's very depressing.

I challenge them on it but whether any of it gets through, who knows.

I completely agree with the OP.

StillAwake, I think it is brilliant of you to have talked to your son about the wrong ideas he was picking up at school.

Apparently Oxford and Cambridge are now having consent classes for all freshers.
It is already too late for some girls who have already had terrible things happen at school. I think these classes should happen at school too.

The worst of it is that it is happening just at much at places like these universities and also at private schools where the boys should be able to think outside the macho box and are supposed to be 'gentlemen' as well as scholars. What gentleman would coerce anyone? Especially someone off guard who had been drinking.

In any place, what sort of unmanly coward/bully is a man who does that?

Recently a student got acquitted at Cambridge for alleged rape. The girl was drunk, not allegedly drunk. So acquitted or not, he was vile to my mind.

(I know rape happens to boys too, but I just have never personally known a man or boy who has been raped.)

Alcohol/rape/sexual assault. I saw the film High Society the other day and struck by how Frank Sinatra pointedly did not go to bed with Grace kelly when she got drunk on champagne and started flirting with him. The implication was that he could have, but was too much of a gent and it was simply out of the question for his character. (I am not suggesting that drunk girls flirt, but this was the case in the film.)

On the other hand Gone with the Wind has a condoned rape scene. It is the famous picture of Clark Gable carrying Scarlett O'Hara up the stairs after she resisted him.
Actually Rhett seemed to be sorry and left the house after that, but the message remained that Scarlett's 'No' meant 'Yes' and it is all supposed to be romantic.

Woman friends of mine are rape apologists, for example: 'Short skirts, cleavage? Why would they be surprised if they get raped?; She said 'No [further] after initial sexual contact like kissing? A bit confusing for the boy, isn't it?'

AyeAmarok Yes, that is what I meant, thank you!

LyingWitchInTheWardrobe different; I read your OP another way and it hit a sore spot, Aye's post explains better. I'm sorry Thank you..I appreciate that, though I did think that what I posted was quite clear, but fair enough.

Not once did I suggest that I was sick of women finding support here & I do actually post extensively on such threads, shooting down posters who suggest that op's put up with it. I was just saying that I am finding it such a bloody battle right now. But that won't stop me posting, because I believe every time someone posts such things, they need to be challenged, and no matter how sick & tired of it I am, I will keep doing it because I believe that women need support, far more than I need to not post. If that makes sense?

I haven't namedchanged, been under this name for years now.

Where I disagree with the 'relationship crowd' is that too often the general tone is the man has no rights at all and even voicing his unhappiness or setting out the consequences is immediately labelled as coercion I don't think he has no right to voice his unhappiness. I don't think that it the general tone here either. He doesn't have a right to voice them by sulking, threatening, manipulation though.

There is a world of difference in "I am unhappy that this situation has gone on for a few months, what can we both do about it" to "if you don't sleep with me, I'll have an affair & it will be your fault"

Or sulking, being abusive. Or overriding consent by unwanted touching.
What right do any of us telling a woman who has withdrawn from the physical side because she has birth injuries and is awaiting hospital appts for such, that her dh touching her while masturbating is ok, because she has withdrawn consent?

Or telling a woman who had sex three weeks ago (and approx. once a month prior), that she has created a celibate life for her dh, and that it will be her fault when he has an affair? That she should just let him grope her while she masturbates?

My mum is over 75. When she found out I'd had sex for the first time, she treated me like a dirty whore and said to me menacingly, you are tainted, your husband will know.

Jesus fucking christ.

I can see the generational point to side with the men when women are of a certain age.

I agree. If a woman is uncomfortable about unwanted touching/sexual pressure from a man then don't question it, don't minimise it, just advise. Or don't advise, if you are of the mind that its her man so he has the right to touch her whenever he wants to.

& also what about the ones where DH is displaying really shitty behaviour then up pops "is he depressed?" " does he have ADHD?" WHY must there always be a medical explanation/diagnosis/implication for a man behaving like a selfish idiot? Suppose he is actually..you know.. just a selfish idiot? Depression or ADHD don't as standard manifest in treating your partner like crap, do they?

& then the woman is advised to take steps to resolve (thats right, put the load on women's shoulders again)...get him to the GP (because he definitely will go, and GP will diagnose him, won't he), look up information, talk and talk and talk to him etc..

Basically - youre the woman, you sort it out.

The problem arises where a 'reasonable expectation' of sex is implied in a marriage or long term relationship and the woman unilaterally withdraws or significantly curtails the sexual part of the relationship that was previously enjoyed.

This is not a black and white issue. Of course any woman (or man) has the right to decide they don't want sex at all for any reason.

However, in that case I don't think it is unreasonable for the man to feel very unhappy, strongly express that unhappiness, ask the woman to change her mind, and seek a mutually agreed way to bring the relationship back to what it was. If that doesn't happen or a reasonable explanation given (e illness) then he has the right to lay out the consequences which is that the relationship end or he be allowed an open relationship.

Interesting viewpoints Perseus although, is it linked to this post really, in terms of assault of a woman? As in, if a woman doesn't want sex with her husband its still not his right to touch her sexually, or just "take" sex from her.

I am going to assume it is not, as I know you did not mean it like that based on all else you said. But its not a subject that seems to get any discussion really. ie if a woman withdraws sex from her DH and he is sexually frustrated, or still wants sex with her then it seems to me he is "bad" for this and should put up or shut up, or spend years aiming to "understand" her. If they are married and have DCs, even more so. Its not about what he wants, he should be able to "control himself". If he finds sexual gratification elsewhere whether by affair or other means, he is wrong and the woman should seek a divorce.

I have seen posts along that line, not recently though, and I do wonder how it is that some can be so unrealistic about what real life and marriage/commitment sharing life with a partner truly involves

.

O.P.
Being a woman does not mean I adhere to some herd mentality of what is right and wrong. Just because poster's have different opinions or perspectives you don't like, is it really justified to start a thread denouncing those opinions? MN is a democracy last time I looked. Interesting how you are pro rights of women over their bodies but intolerant of other women's opinions, rather than just opting out or having your say on the thread and leaving it.

And fwiw I agree wholeheartedly with Perseus and I have actual and unfortunate experience of rape, and find it highly upsetting how often it is dropped in threads to shut down conversation. I did not comment on the thread in question as the response was a pretty much foregone conclusion along the lines of man wants sex=cold hearted, bullying, sexually predatory bastard. I gave it two pages before the utterly demeaning advice of 'tell him to stop being pathetic/sulking and go and wank himself.' Was trotted out. Didn't have to wait long.

There is huge demeaning of men on the relationships board to the point of toxicity with virtually every other problem summarised with LTB, or emotional abuse or the No.1 'controlling'. People are told to dump their marriages pretty quickly and whilst there are definitely threads where that advice is more than justified there are plenty that aren't IMO. Just the other day there was a ridiculous thread that considered whether men have feelings. Seriously. Get a grip and appreciate that other women have options that vary from yours. As for 'my body my right', yes I agree with that, but if you take that stance in a union based on the collaboration of two people whose thoughts and feelings are equal in importance and you shift the balance to favour the importance of the feelings of only one of you, there may be consequences regardless of whether it's your right. It's called cause and effect. Or life.

A lot of advice on RL is not given on the basis of preserving the marriage but on some vague idea of an imaginary sisterhood which patently doesn't exist if the affair threads are anything to go by.

AntiqueSinger I am anti any opinion that advocates women should be nothing more than sex toys for their boyfriend/spouse/partner. Whether it is coming from a male or female.

I don't pass by & not comment because telling a woman who doesn't want sex with her husband that she should let him grope while he wanks himself, is not a healthy opinion & it isn't one that we should be encouraging woman to part-take in when she is suffering from recent birth injuries.

And yes, it is worth starting a thread about them. because just like them, I am allowed my opinion too.

But thank you for suggesting that I not post my opinion, while telling me that other people are entitled to theirs...somewhat crossed message there, I think.

My mum is in her 60s, my dad says she is "further left than North Korea" because he's taking the piss out of her commitment to equality.

Yet she still says things like "she wants to be raped" about my concerns about her sister being in an abusive relationship and she agreed totally with the 'there's date rape and then there's real rape' comment Ken Clarke made....

I do think there is a generational thing.

Antique - sexual touching is an issue of law not a relationship issue or an issue of personal opinion.

The onus is on every man and woman to ensure they have consent for any and all sexual activity. If you do not ensure you have consent and go ahead imposing sexual activity that is unwanted by the other person you have committed a crime which is potentially prosecutable so no it is not about making one person more important that the other and destroying the equality of a relationship.

It's an issue of law concerned with protecting a person's right to consent to sexual activity.

It's beyond the pale to suggest that expecting consent is destructive in a relationship. A good relationship between equals who have respect for each will never cross that boundary.

Accepting a relationship with someone who doesn't respect your bodily autonomy and right to consent will mean you will never be their equal.

I am anti any opinion that suggests that women should be nothing more than sex toys

Where was it suggested that the OP was nothing more than a sex toy?

You started a thread wherein you asserted that your opinion is the only opinion that matters and how very dare other women post any other perspective. You are quick to assume the worst intentions from posters who gave a different perspective from your own. I responded in like manner. Doesn't come across well does it?

And I found all the wanking comments demeaning to both parties. Interesting that you only found it demeaning to one.

Suggesting that a woman lie back & be groped while her dh wanks (yes, that was the op's complaint) is treating the woman as a sex toy.

Actually where are these threads with lots of women advising or at least implicating that a husband/partner has the right to touch his wife/partner intimately when she does not want that and/or is ill and tired? Im asking as Im interested, and rather surprised that this would be a majority view on MN

I also think there are more men around these days. Sometimes being very direct about being a man posting from a male point of view, and other times they write under the guise of a woman. Its pretty obvious. So that might skewer opinions here and there to an extent

But above and despite all that - it is still a woman's right to say no both legally and morally. No matter what.

Oh ok..just read the thread I think this post is about and Im lost for words...