Am I over reacting- partner finished inside me

[MyRealBiscuit]

Bit of background, we conceived a child whilst I was using birth control so are now extra cautious and he doesn't finish inside me. He has demonstrated good control of this over 8.5 months of having regular sex but the other night he "got carried away" in his words... why do I feel so crap and out of control about it? Took the morning after pill which I was angry about as I've had it in the past and it really plays havoc with my hormones.

Yes but that isn't what the op is pissed off about is it, she's annoyed he's been inside her and that is being unreasonable as it's not out of the realms that he will one day get overexcited and this may happen. If she doesn't want his sperm to enter her then he needs to wear condoms. Or him get a vesectomy or try another method of contraception like the implant that she perhaps has more confidence in than the pill. No one thinks she's stupid just unreasonable to not forsee this could happen.

@Bananadana you really do need to learn more about consent.

for example, I literally read this story on the bbc half an hour before I read OP’s post. Men really can “help themselves” when they want to.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6279gpde6zo.amp

I'm sorry this happened to you op. Your head must be shredded.

If you don't want to risk pregnancy don't have sex, simple.

Oh for goodness sake! Of course she hasn’t. Get a grip!

I am so disheartened by the amount of probable female posters who fail to understand consent. This happened to me. I told him not to ejaculate inside me. He did and I had to deal with the consequences which were not pleasant. How would you like that?

If you don't want kids, there's no reason not to use condoms. Ideally a secondary form of contraception too.

Otherwise, you are trying for a baby.

Personally, I'd expect him to have the snip if we didn't want kids and had been together a few years. Makes more sense than me putting hormones in my body.

Oh god @Bananadana will you catch onto yourself. Are you a man? Because you’re speaking to an upset woman in an incredibly disrespectful and flippant way. Horrible.

If it was an accident it doesn't count. You do know they can't always control it right? One accident in 8 months is good going.

If he held her down so she couldn't escape or, keeps repeating the same behaviour and insisting she keep tolerating it - THEN it would be rape.

As is, it seems he simply prematurely ejaculated. That's always a risk. But not a crime in itself.

Its a risk you take if you have sex without a condom. They can't always pull out in time.

But pre-cum could have gotten you pregnant? Him leaking before coming fully could have gotten you pregnant? If he ejaculated previously (by masturbation) before entering you, it could get you pregnant. He could have pulled out on time and a few drops still entered you, and you get pregnant. Why wouldn't you just wear a condom which is the only way to control what sperm gets into you?

And OP's fella also has to deal with the consequences of her birth control pill failing. He could have thought she did it on purpose and lied to get pregnant or been careless about taking it, because what are the odds she's the 2% for whom birth control fails. Relationships need to have some degree of trust, and common sense or there's no point being in them, if everything is assumed with the worst intentions.

Are you serious? Unbelievable.

If he did it on purpose, it was rape. R (F) v DPP, para 26 onwards.

If he did it on purpose, yes, it was rape.

The specific agreement was to withdraw.

He breached the agreement without her consent.

The technical details of whether he could get her pregnant at any other point of the evening are not relevant to the breaching of the agreement.

That is what has broken the trust.

Stealthily could equally be applied here. A condition of sex was broken by the man.

He's an adult and seemingly a 'mature' one. He agreed he would pull out, and has done so successfully for 8 and a half months. If he's not able to withdraw he shouldn't have agreed that he would. If ejaculating was a shock to him he should try to understand his partner's distress and be apologetic.

Ah dude. You can't live like that if you're on the pill and taking the MAP you're properly risking blood clots.

Bloke and his overriding consent aside. You need a different method of contraception.

Go and educate yourself.
I'm not going to bother trying.

This is not at all the same situation. If you read further down, it evens says so here!!

1. We must emphasise that we are not addressing the situation in which sexual intercourse occurs consensually when the man, intending to withdraw in accordance with his partner's wishes, or their understanding, nevertheless ejaculates prematurely, or accidentally, within rather than outside his partner's vagina. These things happen. They always have and they always will, and no offence is committed when they do. They underline why withdrawal is not a safe method of contraception. Equally we are not addressing the many fluctuating ways in which sexual relationships may develop, as couples discover and renew their own levels of understanding and tolerance, their codes of communication, express or understood, and mutual give and take, experimentation and excitement. These are intensely private matters, personal to the couple in question.

Someone else has kindly posted the legal standing on this position here. I have pasted in the relevant bits here:

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2013/945.html

1. We are all sadly familiar with the offence of rape. It is salutary to remind ourselves from time to time of its precise ingredients. S.1(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 provides:
2. "A person (A) commits an offence if –
3. (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina … of another person with his penis,
4. (b) (B) does not consent to the penetration, and
5. (c) (A) does not reasonably believe that (B) consents".

Ejaculation is irrelevant to this definition: so is pregnancy. If ejaculation occurs it may be an aggravating feature relevant to sentence: it is irrelevant to proof of the offence itself.

We must emphasise that we are not addressing the situation in which sexual intercourse occurs consensually when the man, intending to withdraw in accordance with his partner's wishes, or their understanding, nevertheless ejaculates prematurely, or accidentally, within rather than outside his partner's vagina. These things happen. They always have and they always will, and no offence is committed when they do. They underline why withdrawal is not a safe method of contraception. Equally we are not addressing the many fluctuating ways in which sexual relationships may develop, as couples discover and renew their own levels of understanding and tolerance, their codes of communication, express or understood, and mutual give and take, experimentation and excitement. These are intensely private matters, personal to the couple in question.

If a man & woman agree to have sex on the proviso he withdraws before ejaculation,misses timing & woman becomes pregnant it is 100% a 50/50 risk

Most of us have had an accident in our lifetimes when the male has got a bit over excited.

Nope, never happened. That's because I've never pretended to myself that withdrawing has any kind of contraceptive effect, so I've always insisted on condoms, used a different contraceptive, or both.

That doesn't mean that the OP is wrong for feeling that her husband has abused her trust. It also doesn't stop it from being rape if he did so deliberately.