Was this rape/sexual abuse of some sort?

[breakfastatchanel]

This is something that happened a few years ago when I was at University living on campus in my first year. But I am just thinking about it now because something I read reminded me of it. And I'm curious if this would actually be considered rape or sexual abuse of some sort? I never thought it was before but now I'm wondering.

So basically after a night out I went back with this guy to his room (in one of the accommodation on campus). I wasn't that drunk, I can remember everything that happened and was perfectly lucid so that wasn't really an issue. But anyway I for some reason thought it was a good idea to have be promiscuous with boys I hardly knew because everyone else seemed to be doing it. Anyway, I guess we were kissing on the bed and then he took off my underwear and started to give me oral sex. I remember not liking as it was quite rough and regretting my decision but I pretended to be enjoying it or at least I didn't do anything and just put up with it trying to convince myself it was fine (not his fault though) anyway then he turned me over unto my front and carried on giving me oral sex and using his hands. Then he suddenly started to have sex with me which caught me by surprise. I would have had sex with him but I would never have agreed to do it with no condom. But once he started I just decided that the risk of infection and pregnancy was already there and I would already have to go to the clinic in the morning anyway so I didn't say anything and just let him carry on without any sign. I didn't like it either but I didn't want to cause any embarrassment for me or him so I just waited for it to be over and pretended it was okay.

I took the morning after pill the next day and then about a week later I went to the clinic to get checked out. Because I actually had thrush from it (for the only time in my life) but wanted to get checked out anyway. The nurse wanted to hear what happened and was asking questions and I told her that I would never normally have unprotected sex and she asked questions I ended up explaining what happened just so she wouldn't think I was reckless and because she was asking. I remember she seemed to be sympathetic and take it quite seriously when I told her which I was surprised about because I thought it was all me and normal. But she never said it was sexual assault or anything like that I just remember her face and the way she spoke like she felt bad for me rather than saying it was all my fault. i dunno though.

So what would this be classed as? Or would it just be me having sex that I didn't want to have but not saying anything and getting myself into a silly position (so to speak).

It's not really bothering me personally and never really did and it was ages ago anyway but I'm just curious in general about this kind of thing. Thanks.

p.s. Also in my second year of university I remember I was kissed against my will twice by two different people on two different occasions. I did the same thing and just pretended it was fine and mutual so I didn't pull away straight away to avoid embarrassment because it was both people I knew who hung around with the same people as me so i didn't want things to be awkward if they thought they had imposed on me. So I just waited a few seconds and then pulled away and just continued to act as friends. One of them did up against a wall. Both times it was totally by surprise and quite forceful. Was that sexual assault? Even though it was just kissing?

Rattata - what question am I avoiding and also you question my motives for posting on this thread???? Excuse me!!!

I'm all for women wearing, doing etc etc what they want. But ultimately until men stop raping I will still have to be careful in the situations I put myself so that I can try to be safe. I agree it isn't always random men it is often blokes we know. But the OP didn't know this bloke so that is what I'm focusing on. I agree that the bloke behaved appallingly. But I don't feel it was rape - there I've answered the question.

There were 331 male victims of homicide in the year ending March 2015, down 3% from 340 in the previous year and continuing a generally downward trend. In contrast, the number of female homicide victims increased slightly, from 183 to 186 victims (a 3% increase), although the longer- term trend is slowly downward.

There were large differences in the victim-suspect relationship between men and women. In the year ending March 2015, just under half (49%) of female victims aged 16 or over were killed by their partner/ex-partner2 (81 offences). This is 5 percentage points lower than that found in the year ending March 2014 (54%) but broadly similar to the year ending March 2013 and continues a general downward trend since year ending March 2009.

In contrast, only 6% of male victims aged 16 or over were killed by their partner/ex-partner in the year ending March 2015 (19 offences), a percentage that is similar to previous years (Appendix Table 2.06 (1.59 Mb Excel sheet), Figure 2.5).

Female victims (68%) were more likely than male victims (52%) to have been acquainted with the principal suspect

The relationship between victim and principal suspect is not always known and, for the purposes of this analysis, such cases have been included in the ‘stranger’ category. Stranger category includes: business associate, police/prison officer killed in the course of duty, stranger (terrorist/contract killing and other) and where there is insufficient information about the suspect to determine relationship to victim.

Partner/ex-partner includes the sub-categories 'spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend/girlfriend, ex-spouse/ex-cohabiting partner/ex-boyfriend/girlfriend, adulterous relationship, lover’s spouse or emotional rival'.

Rattata - what question am I avoiding and also you question my motives for posting on this thread???? Excuse me!!!

I'm all for women wearing, doing etc etc what they want. But ultimately until men stop raping I will still have to be careful in the situations I put myself so that I can try to be safe. I agree it isn't always random men it is often blokes we know. But the OP didn't know this bloke so that is what I'm focusing on. I agree that the bloke behaved appallingly. But I don't feel it was rape - there I've answered the question.

Acting like you don't know which question I'm talking about and then finishing your post by making it clear you do isn't doing anything to make you look sincere.

Women are quite likely to be murdered by their partners

What does this have to do with OP who wasn't going out with the guy?

Responding to this post, Driving.

"We have the freedom to do that I agree but should we when we know men can rape or murder us? "

HTH.

I hope I word this correctly.

I do understand wanting to keep our dds safe and giving them advise etc on an individual level I want to keep her safe but I also don't want to out any responsibility for men's actions on to her, and it's something I still struggle with.

It makes dd angry that girls are often told to not do things like get drunk or walk home alone because it increases the chances of an assault. She also said if society really wanted to keep women safe from potential assault from men, they would advise women not to live or socialise with males because the vast majority of rape is carried out by men known to the victim.

I could say I only get taxis home after nights out to protect myself as I don't want to walk home alone and it would be seen as sensible, but if I said I won't ever marry or live with a man to protect myself as stats show I'm much much more likely to be raped by my husband I'd be called hysterical and no doubt a man hater.

I guess I'm just wondering why as a society we tell women and girls ways to protect themselves from stranger rape, when, going on stats, living with a man is a much bigger threat?

The sad truth is,that even when women try to be "smart and safe" they still get assaulted. By the cab driver they called,the boss that gave them a lift ,the friend that "kindly" offered to walk them home.

P.s. I disagree with anyone getting shit faced drunk for a variety of reasons like accidents,getting run over,losing wallet/phone/both or them being stolen,getting into fights etc. Sexual assault is actually at the bottom of that list.

She was on her front - if he'd put his uncondomed penis into her anus without seeking consent, would you still be saying the OP should 'take responsibility', as opposed to the penis owner?

I think that to a lot of people "one night stand" means a package of sexual activities which does include PIV but does not include PIA or whipping or anyother specific things others have mentioned.

What I mean is, if for instance someone tells me they had a ONS on the weekend then without further detail or qualification this means that they had PIV sex with someone. They might have done PIA or sadomasochism or anything else, but these are not part of the "default package" and would need to be made plain (if the person wished me to know about them specifically). Whereas they would not need to further say "oh and I had PIV with them" because, well, that's "by default" for ONS, IYSWIM.

Of course whether someone on a ONS ought to assume that actual PIV sex or anything else they see as part of the "default package" is what they are both going back for, then when sexual things start happening whether they ought to see them as "stepping stones" towards the PIV sex they are assuming they are there for. I would agree that they shouldn't if they do.

Sure, JAPAB, if someone told me she had a ONS, I'd probably assume she had PIV unless she specified otherwise.

But two people who don't know each other in bed together? Everything should proceed through mutual agreement, not with one eye on the post incident description.

I guess I'm just wondering why as a society we tell women and girls ways to protect themselves from stranger rape, when, going on stats, living with a man is a much bigger threat?

It isn't all or nothing. It's a trade-off between freedom and safety.

Never leaving my house at all might reduce my chance of burglary to a greater extent than just simply locking up when I leave. But it takes too much freedom away from me.

Recommending someone never lives with or is alone with any man ever, might also cross the 'too freedom impinging' line.

It isn't all or nothing. It's a trade-off between freedom and safety.

Never leaving my house at all might reduce my chance of burglary to a greater extent than just simply locking up when I leave. But it takes too much freedom away from me.

That's kind of my point, advising a woman to not walk home alone after dark to reduce risk of assault and should she follow it, it takes quite a bit of freedom away from her, it's limits what hours she can work and what socialising she can do if she wanted to follow advice.

Recommending someone never lives with or is alone with any man ever, might also cross the 'too freedom impinging' line.

I agree, but I also think that the other things that are reccomended to women are freedom impinging too and have potential to limit a woman's lifestyle choices in many ways, and was trying to figure out in my head advising women to take freedom reducing steps to minimise a small risk is reasonable, wheras advising them freedom reducing ways to reduce the bigger and more common risks is a step too far if that makes sense.

I was wondering if it's anything like, advising a women not to walk home alone at dark, only impacts her freedom, whereas advising women to not marry for example, impacts and limits men's choices too?

I hope I make sense, I'm just thinking as I go and it makes sense in my head but putting into words jumbles it a bit.

Buffy i think the analogy would be more like...you need an alarm system,locked doors and windows,a weapon and a guard dog. If you still get robbed you get questioned if you have all of those,if not well why not? Are they proper ones? Is the dog a doberman or a chihuahua? Oh ffs you let the burglar in cause you knew him? Well what did you expect?
Wait a second,you had your curtains drawn so everyone could see the nice things you have? You had delivery of big expensive things in broad daylight for everyone to see? Well what do you expect?
Did you say no while they were taking the stuff? Did you try to fight them off? Have you by any chance let other people take things from your house before? Is it known that you willingly gave things to others?

Whilst of course there is a conversation to be had in general about ways women might be able to reduce the risk of rape, that conversation is going to be quite limited and is absolutely inappropriate after the event or when someone reveals sexual assault. That applies also to a thread where the OP reveals sexual assault, imo.

There are some things that can be done to reduce the very rare incidence of stranger rape. There are even fewer things that a woman can do to reduce her risk of being raped by an acquaintance (such as in this scenario). There is very very little a woman can do to protect herself from being rape within an intimate relationship.

The very best way to end all forms of rape is for men to stop raping. Instead of victim blaming and picking over women's behaviour, let's look hard at male entitlement, control, and power, which are at the root of all rapes. Rape prevention starts with us all being prepared to do that.

I agree 100% with you Kally. But how do we do that (your last comment). You only have to look at the reaction by some people to the recent high profile rape cases regarding the women's behaviour. Male entitlement is ingrained and women are not respected.

"We all know in real world once things are under way it is not practical to stop the process."

Um, why not?

You think a man couldn't stop if he heard a window being smashed or his mum yelling 'only me!' as she let herself in with her key?

Many women may feel obliged to continue, and certainly sex education should include the message that either party can change their mind at any time, but not sure what the 'not practical' part of your sentence meant.

"But how do we do that (your last comment)."

One thing we can stop doing is blaming women for the actions of men!

Sorry this happened to you, Op. I think it was wrong. Your situation is one I've thought a lot about because it could easily have been me when I was that age. I don't know that I could call it rape because our expectations if men are not always clear. But I'm not sure.

Not intuitive to stop the process perhaps. If we're going to call men rapists if they don't do this and ask for verbal consent (and go on to define unwanted sex as invariably rape and punish accordingly) we do need a consensus on that and a lot of education of the fact.

As things stand, I feel there is definitely a grey area when women participate in relations they don't want to have and in doing so give the impression that they are enthusiastic participants in a natural unfolding of events. There is room for a mistake, however abhorrent it is when that is played on falsely. What else can a jury do but look at instances like this on a case by case basis.

He should have asked. I just don't know if we can expect him to know that in our society at the moment.

I think this thread has given me a lot of food for thought. My eldest daughter is shy just like me I will teach her not to feel embarrassed to say something if she is not happy. Parents has to talk to their children as well leaving it up to schools to teach you're kids everything including sex education I doubt they will get much out of it. Looking back 15 years when I left school not much has changed if people are still walking around not understanding sex. Women are more vulnerable than men. I'm going to talk to my daughter I would hate for her to go through this I want her to have the confidence to tell a man what she wants and don't want and know when something is wrong.

I was stating that once things have begun, and the woman is consenting, he did not stop to ask, YES wrong, YES he should have asked, -- BUT she should have said no.... and lets be honest that is the practical moment that is difficult for both to stop.. YES obviously if there was an intruder in the room he i am sure both would stop, BUT in that moment of passion, they had both had opportunity to ask and/or say no. in this case, and cases i experienced it was wrong for the man, and NO excuse, but it was not rape.

I'll be honest, this is the first time I've seen an attempt to extend the (already questionable) argument of it being difficult to stop when climax is imminent, to it being difficult to stop before penetration has actually occurred.

Can you explain how that works?

And can you explain how what occurred is not rape? Like actually explain your reasoning, not repeat accusations of blame and shared responsibility. The criteria for rape are actually quite clear if we're talking theoretically, rather than how easy it would be to establish sufficient evidence in a courtroom.

Sure, JAPAB, if someone told me she had a ONS, I'd probably assume she had PIV unless she specified otherwise.

But two people who don't know each other in bed together? Everything should proceed through mutual agreement, not with one eye on the post incident description.

I agree, but until we reach the Utopia when everyone acts and thinks as they ought to, then

1. There are a lot of people for whom going off for a ONS with someone means PIV sex unless this is overtly indicated otherwise.

2. There are many men who will carry on unless they hear a stop, or a 'not doing that' was otherwise previously made clear to them ('it is not as if I'm a rapist or anything - of course if she says stop I will stop, and of course if she has said she doesn't want to do something I wouldn't go ahead and do it anyway').

I suppose I can see the pragmatic appeal in suggesting that if one of the parties on the ONS does not want to have PIV they make this plain just in case that was the other's assumption/expectation.

Then if that guy turns out to be one of those guys who doesn't thinks as he ought to, doing or saying something she shouldn't have to might result in a bad experience not happening.

P.S. The burglary example was just about demonstrating that the effectiveness of a suggestion in terms of minimising one's chances of being burgled (or the victim of anyother crime) is not the only consideration, you have to consider how much freedom following that suggestion takes away.

And if an individual takes things to extremes "but people shouldn't be having ONS then bad ONS experiences would not happen to them" well that individual is wrong. The person suggesting something "milder" like "make clear what you want/don't want" is not guilty for the extremists.