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.

"Peabrain" is a comedy insult not a "slur". So sensitive.

@CharlieDickens i am sorry this happened to you and you are very brave sharing your experience to make us all more aware 💐

No, it had been absolutely awful to see.

I caught up with most of the thread and see people took their time to explain to you and others carefully why it is rape and they still persisted to say otherwise. Some of the stuff posted has just been horrific.

I’m no longer engaging with rape apologists on this thread.

It's really traumatising and triggering for people who have been through it. People come on here looking for advice and support, not to have their experiences minimised or told they should have behaved differently.

@CharlieDickens

Absolutely. I’m with you on this.

I still have problems with swallowing because of what my ex did to me 7 months ago. There weren't any bruises on any other part of my body, so clearly it couldn't have been that bad?

That is beyond horrendous. I’m so sorry.

Wtf? Are you the kind of person who insists on believing all women who claim they have been raped?

Yes, because its the decent thing to do.

Are you the kind of person who doesn't insist on believing all women who claim they have been raped?!??

No, I'm the kind of person who takes a woman (or man or child) at her word if she says she has been raped, treats her with compassion, but at the same time does not condemn the accused until he has been proven guilty.
This is my general view. Obviously, there are times when I would 100% believe a victim, for example, if it were a person I knew and whom I knew would not lie.

It is not the "decent thing to do" to condemn an accused person outright with no proof in every circumstance.

They're gaslighting and DARVO is olympic world record. They're the ones in a cult. A cult of supporting rape, promoting rape, and justifying rape. At this point I genuinely do not believe they are female. No females, no matter how misguided on the issue, double, triple and quadruple etc down when told how wrong it is for a male not to give consent. They are goady male trolls imo. No woman would come back again and again and again and again and again to argue the toss that a male not getting consent is ok. Ok now we have a really nasty pos arguing we shouldn't automatically believe all women. These males are posting here out of a rape fantasy. And I am done giving them ammo to jerk off to.

Then that is sad lack of education and neglectful upbringing then if you genuinely never knew a man wasn't supposed to rape you, and that consent was needed before sex. I wonder what sort of area or place you grew up in that you had no one to teach you that most very basic concept. I feel sorry that you didn't have a good upbringing or people to care for you. I get the feeling you're not from the UK but a developing nation? If so I apologise. But once you were told that rape is wrong, and of course, consent is needed for sex (and before a man punches you in the face or chokes you, because both are assault and it's wrong for a man to punch a woman in the face and/or choke her. Murder is also wrong btw) you shouldn't have kept trying to justify it. You were told that rape is wrong. That assault is wrong. Now you know. Please don't try to justify it any further and stop arguing with us please.

You are deliberately misinterpreting many things that have been said.
I am female. I have never once said that rape is right.

You are so blinded by your need to be right that you have bullied and insulted people who have a more nuanced view of possibilities.

And NO we should absolutely NOT automatically believe anyone who accuses anyone else of anything. Why do you think there is a presumption of innocence in our legal system?
That does not mean I would treat an accuser as a liar. I would not. In many circumstances I would not know whether or not the abuse had happened so I would err on the side of caution and treat that person with compassion. And I would view the accused as innocent until proven guilty. This is called a balanced approach.

Bullying males (who are clearly getting off on rape stories and trying to encourage women to doubt that it's rape) calling women defending ourselves from male bullying and gaslighting 'bullies' and accusing us of insulting. Completely predictable bullying, gaslighting and DARVO-like behaviour of males. Accuse women of doing every single thing you are doing. It won't work.

You talk in jargon because you are in a cult. You know quite well I am not a man. Accusing me of being one is all you have left.

Didn't us women know there is a 'nuanced' view of rape, a 'nuanced' view of punching a woman in the face, and a 'nuanced' view of choking a woman? Oh and us feminists are just 'in a cult'.

Best we leave these porn addled males desperate for rape fantasies - and that's all this is, to be honest, it's crystal clear now we are dealing with males, to themselves.

You are obsessed with "porn addled males desperate for rape fantasies". It's not healthy.

@SleeplessInWherever .

I would be ok with certain things that I know some other women wouldn't be, choking for example.

I still expect the man to know I want to do something like that before even attempting it. Because if not then I would think 'he's probably caused some trauma to women along the way' and that's not the kind of man I want in my bed. 😷😷

Doesn't matter if I personally like it. It's a huge red flag.

I don't believe this for a single second, unless you were raised in some kind of cult.

Did you also not know that it's illegal to steal stuff or to murder someone?

To be quite honest I live in the 3rd world country of England and was asleep in my perfectly reasonable home, at 2am.

I didn’t, and don’t, require convincing that rape is wrong. My point all long is that perhaps due to lack of education, or whatever reason, some people’s understanding of what rape IS may differ to yours until told otherwise. But further to that, I don’t need your sympathy or to justify whether I’m cared for or loved as a human. Or whether I grew up in a bin.

This isn’t the thread or place - but the acronyms that frankly I’ve had to look up everytime you use one, and talk of porn addled weirdo men who are obsessed with hurting women, have just shown that there’s a majority of women who absolutely believe that men are tyrannical abusers who put us at automatic risk all day every day, and I think that’s sad too. Sure I’ve met the men you speak of, but I’ve met the opposite too, and for me feminism isn’t assuming the worst in everyone all the time.

Of course I believe a woman who has been, or says she has been a victim of any abuse should be listened to. But I also believe that there are men who are falsely accused, because that too happens. I’ve seen it happen.

You’ll be pleased know that I’m not going to spend my entire day arguing with a load of women who clearly don’t actually believe in equality. If you did, you’d also believe in everyone’s equal opportunity to think for themselves, have their own opinions and to not feel the need to vilify every man on earth for the (huge) mistakes and behaviours of some. Women supporting women by speaking to them the way you have? Not a bandwagon I’d like to be on thanks.

Besides, I can’t argue with you all day - I’ve got a hut to tidy, a man to convince to adore me and bruises to cover up.

@SleeplessInWherever

I don’t know if it’s reasonable for a man to assume he’s allowed to choke someone because others have allowed him to, because I’m not claiming to make blanket rules for all people to follow in their sex lives. What I, or someone else think is reasonable, doesn’t have to be what you think is reasonable, that’s how life works.

It's terrifying you think that it would ever be reasonable for a man to choke someone unannounced, without discussion, let alone during sex.

Whether or not the recipient of the choking would be ok with it or not isn't the point.

You've just said that you think it would sometimes be acceptable for a man to unannounced, without permission choke a woman during sex.

Read that back.

It's reasonable to enjoy choking if that's what you're into. It is ever, ever reasonable to choke someone without their consent. Ever.

If a man, without permission, chokes a woman without her consent during sex he has assaulted her. Do you not see how that is a crime, even if he thought (for some reason) that she might let him do it so didn't bother to ask first? Do you not think that's a crime?

I think we’ve covered that. Repeatedly at this point.

But it doesn’t matter what I think a crime is; that’s not how crimes work. They’re either illegal or they’re not.

@SleeplessInWherever

If you think that it may sometimes be reasonable to choke a woman during sex without warning or discussion, then you think that it's sometimes reasonable to sexually assault a woman.

Because choking without warning or discussion, whether during sex or not, is a crime.

And I'm sure you don't actually think that is sometimes reasonable to sexually assault anyone, so I was trying to understand your stance on this.

What she is now saying is simple. She knows it is criminal and agrees that the perpetrators could be prosecuted. She is pointing out that a lot of people, perpetrators and victims, are not really aware that it is criminal. Especially with lesser assaults than choking! I agree with her that it is important to know this. It is a social problem that needs addressing. She has completely repudiated her earlier claim that such assaults weren't criminal because the victims didn't mind. So why not interact with her on the basis of her new position? It is rare, but good, that people change their mind after discussion.

It may be that the perpetrators are less innocent than she gives them credit for - but she knows them and we don't.

Think this thread is becoming something where posters are attacking / arguing with each other. I joined this thread to support the op and I think the main focus needs to go back to this. Since all the debating started she hasn’t been back. Let’s remember the main purpose of the thread was for op to get much needed support and clarification, please take my post in the kindest way.

What I think is reasonable, unreasonable or otherwise is genuinely none of anyone else’s concern, and has absolutely no basis on the (repeated) discussion about what’s legal.

I’ve also made my stance on most things totally clear at this point.

I get that what my personal beliefs are, or what it seems it’s believed they are regardless of what I say, differ to what some of you think and believe. I’m okay with that, and I think it best that others are too - we don’t all have to agree with each other.

This whole thing started because you all said that something was rape, and I basically said “is it? That’s not what I thought?” I actually said in my first post “I think I might have missed something.” It is, sure, but there’s an awful lot of people offended that others are/were working on a different basis.

I can see, and accept that this whole thing has become something of a tangent. However what I would say is that I won’t be spoken about, or to, in the way I have been without responding. We all, funnily enough, have a right to self defence. Had the conversation remained civil it would have ended a long time ago, but while it isn’t - I won’t be sitting here and taking it.

In the interest of getting this thread back to the OP, if anyone (for some bizarre reason) STILL wants to argue with me relentlessly for not being in whatever crowd you’re all in; DM’s are open.

She is pointing out that a lot of people, perpetrators and victims, are not really aware that it is criminal. Especially with lesser assaults than choking!

The question I asked that poster, in response to her posts, was not whether it is criminal for a man to anally penetrate, choke etc. a woman without explicit consent.

It was whether a man could reasonably assume consent for anal penetration or other acts like choking etc. with any woman, without explicit consent, based on previous partners (which was what she raised)..... and she replied that she "couldn't say".

(She had expressed the opinion that this man may not have felt the need to get explicit consent from a woman for anal penetration (even for the first time apparently) because he was previously with women like her, and that that could explain his behaviour).

I also asked to clarify which sex acts she thought were covered by "assumed consent" and she replied "all of them".

All three of those opinions are extremely disturbing, in the context of this thread, and in general.

(Not even touching on criminality).

I certainly haven't reported the posts, but I think if this thread was related to race, for example, or CSA ..... Posts expressing views like this would have been deleted.

This whole thing started because you all said that something was rape, and I basically said “is it? That’s not what I thought?” I actually said in my first post “I think I might have missed something.” It is, sure, but there’s an awful lot of people offended that others are/were working on a different basis.

It is, sure ...

Is this poster actually saying that she now (after women have had to argue with her pages and pages, during which the op was affected by her views, hence mentioning the "polarised views" and her confusion .... thinks the op's scenario is rape?

And she's stating that by casually saying
"It' is, sure" in the middle of a paragraph?

No-one could seriously behave like this, could they? Am I misunderstanding this?