Does anal sex need explicit consent?

[TellingFriends]

2 month relationship.

Man and woman have consensual PIV sex. Is it acceptable for him to have anal sex with her without asking first?

Woman would not have consented if asked beforehand but did not stop him.

Is it fair for him to assume the woman will say no if she doesn't want it?

Woman had never had anal sex before. Woman is also a CSA survivor but he didn't know this.

It needs prep and anyone with a brain knows that it’s not typical. Even gay men have issues with this and need to be clear it’s actually what they want (there is an issue with this in the gay world but not for this post). I’m upset that some people don’t get this.

For goodness sake, try looking at the situation from a legal angle instead of being guided by your emotions and insulting other people who have a bit more analysis than you do. They are not apologists for rapists.

It's rape according to the law as she didn't consent and he had no reasonable knowledge of consent. People who make excuses for rape are rape apologists.

Yes. Please look at it from a legal angle. It’s called rape.

Not sure what that’s got to do with anything, but for what it’s worth, yes?

When did I ever say anything about ‘randomly sticking it in?’

Rape is NOT non-consensual sex. That is only one part of it. Rape is non-consensual sex during which the accused either believes consent is not given or unreasonably believes consent is given.

Because that’s exactly what happened in this scenario.

Probably because it's a ridiculous comparison to the case in point.

Rape is first and foremost about consent. The law is in two parts. 1. Did the victim give consent and 2. Did the perpetrator reasonably believe they had consent.

If it's found to be rape, that means it's non consensual sex.

Sorry, but my preference to not be asked if something is okay every time something new happens is not putting you at risk.

What I’ve repeatedly said is that my physical actions can be taken as consent, I don’t require a conversation, and that my own personal response to something I don’t want would be to indicate that.

I completely accept that evidently isn’t the case for everyone, however if you’re entitled to require clear and concise consent to every sexual opportunity, I’m entitled to not require that same thing.

There’s an awful lot of shaming others going on on this thread. It’s not up to me to tell you what you need to feel comfortable with a sexual partner, and it’s not up to you to tell me that either.

I would argue that he had no reason to believe she was not consenting and every reason to believe she was. She did not remonstrate. I am aware that this doesn't mean she was consenting. But an argument that he genuinely and reasonably believed she was could be made.

But an argument that he genuinely and reasonably believed she was could be made.

In court the onus is on him to prove he had consent. They hadn't discussed anal, they made no preparation, her back was towards him and he didn't ask.

Where's the genuine and reasonable proof of consent?

You are determined that this man is guilty, aren't you?

How do we know he didn't use lube btw?

Try reading the OP.

It is your opinion that he had no "reasonable knowledge of consent". Not a fact. And he doesn't have to have 'knowledge". He has to have "belief".
Just to be clear, I am not saying he did have genuine and reasonable belief in consent. I am merely pointing out the possibility.

Yes, thank you, Ms Law 101.

Wow okay this has sparked quite a debate. Looks like I need to provide a bit more context. Sorry I can’t write it in the first person.

Man is a rugby player, woman is smaller side of average. Both mid 20s.

Went on nice date. 7th or 8th date and 3rd time it ended with sex. Quite a bit of alcohol drunk, back to his house, enjoyable PIV sex, woman took a Valium before bed (has anxiety attacks, helps her to sleep), sleep.

Early next morning, both wake up pleasantly drowsy and hungover. Have consensual PIV sex with no condom. Man orgasms, the result of which makes everything slippery and lubricated down there.

Both naked, man gives woman his rugby shirt to wear, says he finds it hot to see a woman wearing his shirt. Okay fine. All cozy and pleasant. Both lie down again, man spooning woman. Woman dozes off, man probably does too.

Woman wakes up to neck kissing and such, man is clearly horny again. Okay fine. All still feels sleepy and sexy and pleasant.

Man is spooning woman tightly and then, without warning, they are having anal sex. Woman can’t quite process what is happening and doesn’t do or say anything. Her thoughts at the time were, is he doing this on purpose? Embarrassment, shock, why didn’t he ask, relief and surprise that it doesn’t hurt, annoyed that he didn’t ask, wishing she’d been given the chance to consider if that’s something she wanted to try, not wanting to upset him, not wanting to cause a scene, wanting him to like her, this is obviously what he likes, this must be normal right? Freaked out in case he doesn’t realise and it’s a mistake.

Afterwards man makes woman a cup of tea and toast which she doesn’t eat. She leaves and they haven’t spoken since.

He didn't ask because he didn't want to give you the opportunity to say no. Appalling

Just re-read the OP. She said things were "lubricated" down there due to previous vaginal sex without a condom and that it "didn't hurt". So, there was lubrication.

its not about lubrication though is it. It's about consent. He did not obtain it, she did not give it. It was rape.

You are moving the goalposts now. One of your and your cohort's arguments thus far has been that he didn't prep or lube up therefore demonstrating his lack of care for her/her consent. Now I have reminded you that there was lubrication, all of a sudden that bit doesn't matter.
I know it's about consent. For the enth time, it is possible he genuinely and reasonably believed he had it. If you can't acknowledge the possibility let's hope you are never on a jury.

How would he assume he had consent? Describe which part of OPs story constitutes consent to anal penetration it if you're so sure.

To be clear on the law;

If a person ("A"), with A's penis – penetrates to any extent, without (1) another person ("B") consenting, and (2) without any reasonable belief that Bconsents, either intending to do so or reckless as to whether there is penetration, the vagina, anus or mouth of B then – A commits an offence, to be known as the offence of rape.

The fact that there appear to be some people who would consent to someone penetrating them anally without any obvious sign of consent makes no difference. It’s not a reasonable belief to assume this is true of the specific person you are with is one of those people.

OP did not consent. Whether or not you could persuade a jury of this is another matter. Plenty of people have sex with other people without their consent without it being probable - it’s still rape, even if it doesn’t reach the legal standard of proof.

If you stabbed someone and they died, but it could not be proved, it would still in my mind be murder.

She said that they'd had sex, therefore she was lubricated. That doesn't mean he got some lube and suggested anal.

For the enth time, it is possible he genuinely and reasonably believed he had it.

How?