Is being cajoled into having sex rape?

[ThomasRichard]

I'm just looking for opinions as I think through what happened in my marriage (now over). I don't want to minimise anyone's experiences of sexual assault but I was wondering whether what exH used to do was rape or not so I have it straight in my own head. He was emotionally and financially abusive and as a result I didn't feel like sleeping with him very often, although still at least once a week. He didn't think this was enough and used to get into bed when I was trying to read a book or go to sleep and cajole me into having sex with him. It didn't matter what I said, he just wouldn't leave me alone unless I either gave in and had sex just to stop the nagging (which was the outcome most of the time) or snapped at him, at which point he'd sulk and go on about how I wasn't being fair. I didn't want to have sex on any of those occasions but was my 'giving in' consent, even though I'd made it clear that I didn't want to?

It's rape and I'm sorry this happened to you.

How are you coping with it now? Do you feel you might need counselling or is this thread just to help you process what happened to you?

Also I think I get what Rebeca2 was trying to say, although it would be easy to jump all over her post. In the context of me and my personality, if I had had the OPs situation I think I would move on rather than revisit and analyse it until I had a real problem on my hands dealing with it. I would take a pragmatic approach that yes, it was shitty behaviour from my ex, and not right. But I made my decisions at the time the best I could and subsequently removed myself from the situation when I was ready.

And then I'd be proud of myself for sorting it out rather than talk myself into counselling and mental distress. But that is how I deal with things. That's not to say it wouldn't affect someone else more than me.

That's exactly the problem - the moment you feel you have lost any power or control, you have entered abusive territory

And should not blame yourself for it in any way

It's not about being a victim but when you have suffered abuse it often makes you question everything. It's good to go over it now before you enter any other relationship and explore how you feel. I can tell you now that certain acts, comments or positions terrify me and make me freeze. It isn't just something you should put out of your mind, you need to work through it. So Rebecca you aren't being helpful. No one wants to be a victim but some things can run quite deep and scar you. It's ok to work through how you feel about them.

Jesus Christ, some of the responses on this thread

Op I'm sorry you went through this. At best it was coercion, at worst it was rape in my mind. Either way he was an abusive arse who treated you badly.

You could have just told him that sex once a week was enough for you and had a proper discussion about your mismatched sex drives though.
This man was abusing her in other ways. You really think he would have been so reasonable as to have sat down and has a discussion about why she didn't want to have sex with him? No, he would have just carried on pestering until she gave in which funnily enough is exactly what happened to the op.

As for making herself a victim, there are no words. Total victim blaming.

I hope OP hasn't been put off posting because of those responses.

Certain women will always find a way to blame the rape survivor rather than the rapist. It helps with their othering i.e it will never happen to me because I would/wouldn't do etc.

OP, it is healthy to work out how you feel about things in your head after abuse. It grinds you down and clouds your judgement. Figuring out what is normal again isn't always easy. Lots of women have similar questions after feeling abuse.

My ex-H was very similar to how you describe your ex. It was rape. I know that now. I haven't suddenly transformed into a jibbering wreck after coming to terms with this but it has helped me to understand what happened and to deal with it.

It was rape. It was not my fault and I couldn't have stopped it.

sounds a horrible situation and it is of course abusive, but cajoling is not necessarily rape. There is a distinction between consenting to the act and consenting to the surrounding circumstances. Assuming that there is no threat to safety expressly or potentially implicitly made, consent to the actual act seems to be given meaning that it is not legally rape.

Without wanting to get into the morality of horrible and abusive behavior, consent is not the same as wanting to have sex (e.g. there is an old case on a prostitute who was not paid who argued that her consent was predicated on payment so non-payment voided that consent - this argument was rejected by the Court).

I'm not sure that this makes any difference to you anyway, as you were clearly (at least in my view) subject to abuse...

Sexual coercion is a separate and specific offence in Scotland. However to me it's pretty clear: if you don't enthusiastically consent, then it is rape.

Sexual Offences Scotland Act 2009

This is something I'm trying to process at the moment too.
My stbxh is with the ow who was a friend of ours.
I had a bit of an epiphany (if that's the correct word) after a recent counselling session where I remembered an occasion when he didn't take no for an answer.
Since having dc1 I have struggled with the idea of sex. It took 2 years to get pregnant and that involved having sex every other day. For 2 years!
For many reasons my libido wasn't what it was and, after having my dcs, I just didn't want it as much. Coersion became the norm. I never felt threatened but there would've been sulking and irritation. And I felt obliged as his wife. Sometimes he'd be ok if I said I didn't want to.
But once he didn't stop when I told him to.
I can't use the 'r' word.
My stbxh was controlling in many ways. Most of which I'm only realising now, 6 months on from our split. My counsellor describes him as a narcissist with examples of sociopathic and psychopathic behaviour. Most of which I was unaware of when I was in it and has only become obvious since the split. He no longer hides it as well or I no longer have live blinding me.
This is so frightening to me. I've lived 20 years with this man.

It seems the most frightening thing if I admit even to myself that he is a monster. I can't bring myself to tell my counsellor. And haven't told anyone else either.

And the maximum penalty for sexual coercion and rape is exactly the same in Scotland too.

Lonny, sorry to turn this into a legal debate, but if you look at the statute you linked to, you'll see that sexual coercion is also non-consensual, but relates to non-penitrative (with a penis) sexual activity which is not what is described. The consent test is the same as rape - it relates to different sexual acts.

Also, you are of course entitled to your view of what rape is, but your definition is not what the law says.

Again, people seem to have really been through awful experiences and I don't want to turn this into a law lecture, but I think it is important that people understand the meaning of the terms as a matter of law...

I don't think most people on this thread need a lawyer, they feel violated and didn't give consent to an act, they were coerced or manipulated and now feel awful. I think it's just important to work on how you feel now and that it wasn't your fault. No means no. just because you eventually said yes to make the person leave you alone doesn't make it consensual sex but an abusive relationship.

Umm I think a lot of people here haven't considered the "Cup of Tea" analogy - he knew you didn't want "a cup of tea" but kept going on and on until you gave in - this was not consent. Therefore it was Rape/ non consensual sex.

OP phone rape crisis and get some help.

It's rape.

How old is the prostitute case? I think the fact the law has moved on a lot in the past couple of decades is very relevant.

As a society, we need to move away from the 'default yes' view (it wasn't rape unless she protested) to the 'default no' view (without enthusiastic consent, it's rape). Logically, no one goes around thinking oh yes sex right now in the street please. Your default is always 'not now' until something happens that makes you think 'yes, now'.

As a society we need to change our view on this and then the law needs to catch up if it's not there already.

Sunday, since you claim to be telling people what "the law" is, here's at least one jurisdiction where not paying = rape

www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-06/man-jailed-for-rape-after-tricking-sex-worker/6075496

And let's not forget that marital rape only made it as an offence in the UK in 1991. Were no wives raped before then? Of course they were.

Also personally I think the law should always equate sex with a prostitute to rape. Money does not absolve the need for enthusiastic consent which you are highly highly unlikely to be bothering to get from a prostitute.

Men who visit prostitutes are rapists.

It's upsetting to me that we still have to use silly anologies about bevarages to help people, women especially, understand consent.

No means no. It doesn't mean keep asking, it doesn't mean start sulking until you get what you want, it doesn't me mean insult me until I give in, it means no.

Not accepting that no, is rape or at 'best' sexual assault - both serious crimes.

Consent can only be given enthusiastically and without coersion.

Enthusiastic consent is a concept (and a good one) but it isn't the law. You have to prove that someone did not reasonably believe the victim was consenting to prove a rape charge. Even if you nagged them into it, unless you coerced them, it's not rape under UK law.

Consent can only be given enthusiastically and without coersion.

Unless if the word means something different with regards to sex than it does in other walks of life, then there really is no requirement for 'enthusiasm' just agreement (free from threat or coercion etc).

People can consent to all sorts of things they very definitely do not want to do and are not enthusiastic about. Anything from putting out the rubbish or cleaning the toilet all the way to turning the life support off.

Obviously it would be greatly preferable for someone to be consenting enthusiastically, but is that a legal requirement.

The point is not whether it will stand up in law the OP wants to explore how it made her feel. She felt like it was sexual abuse. She hasn't said she wants to prosecute.

Whether it feels like rape is a different question from whether it is rape. It is actually quite irresponsible to go round confirming to someone that they were raped when the reality is that, even if everything they said happened could be objectively demonstrated in court, there would be no conviction because they consented. The man sounds like a complete arsehole and the relationship sounds unhealthy, but it wasn't rape.

Also personally I think the law should always equate sex with a prostitute to rape. Money does not absolve the need for enthusiastic consent which you are highly highly unlikely to be bothering to get from a prostitute.

Many sex workers would disagree that they are being raped. Sure they are doing it for the money but there is nothing to say that people only ought to have sex with a primary motivation of having an enjoyable procreational experience. Somebody's primary purpose might be money, or trying to conceive. Obviously it would be highly preferable if they also had an enjoyable time as well, but if their primary motive is a different result and they get it and they consented, well I can't see the law ever saying that that is rape on a notion that they weren't doing it for recreation.

What people personally think though is irrelevant. Under law it isn't rape. That doesn't mean that it's acceptable or OK but it doesn't mean it's rape just because someone says that it is.

And it's IMO important to recognise the difference between the two. Because for a rape victim, there is a difference between the fact that they had sex without consent and having consented half-heartedly to something for a quiet life iyswim. And for someone who is a rape victim there is a difference. And that difference would likely be argued in court, therefore it's important to recognise it.

No, the question is whether a person was raped, or whether a person might be able to be convicted of rape.