Rape within marriage

[tabouleh]

Yes unashamedly a thread about a thread.

It is like entering the bloody twilight zone over there.

Jeez there are MNers basically caring more about OP's husbands right to sex rather than believing OP and helping her.

Totally understand if this gets deleted for being a thread about a thread - but if it gets more of the feminist viewpoints onto that thread then great.

OK, I think we should officially move on then. Back to the original point of this thread. To support someone who had been raped.

Please spare us any further discussion of where we all went to university...

d A levels in the days when "A" stood for advanced and not "Any fool can get an A"

but not understand that no means no and that a sleeping woman is not a consenting one.

reasonable beleif of consent is just that - if it would be a reasonable assumption that the woman was indeed wanting you to have sex with her.
ie, she is responding to your kisses, she is touching you in response, she is makinmg appreciative noises, SHE IS NOT TELLING YOU NO! SHE IS NOT ASLEEP OR IN SUCH A STATE THAT SHE IS UNABLE TO GIVE OR REFUSE CONSENT.

i would say that any man that finds that difficult to understand is dangerous to women.

Prolesworth,

I am happy to engage. Which response? Was it just an insult or a genuine point that you felt worthy of debate.

Apologies about this being a "support" thread. I found it through "most active". Not super familiar with the site.

As to my view on Anchor herself, she clearly suffered and her husband was well out of order. However, it did sound like he believed that she had consented (see her posts). Is it rape? I guess it would depend on whether this was "reasonable". And, to decide that, you have to know the history of their relationship and the verbal and non verbal cues they give one another.

Anchor seems interested in actually discussing what she should do. And I guess that would be my question to Anchor: could your husband have reasonably misread your intentions? In defence of the guy (I know, I know, a "rapist" does not deserve a defence), it sounds like he was clumsily trying to give her pleasure in a horrible drunken way. He was not really trying to get sexual pleasure himself. And Anchor does say that otherwise he is "a lovely guy". Is there nothing in between "everything is OK" and "he has committed a criminal offence and should be in jail". Is life really that black and white?

Gigantaur,

I do not know why you are debating with me. You and I actually agree with one another :).

Some of the comments on this thread by the rape-deniers are revolting - I'm shocked that people would want to defend rape in any context. How dare anybody think they have the right to tell someone that they were not upset, not traumatised by a situation and that actually, they were not raped because it was their loving husband 'poking his willy'.

This thread reminds me of an item I heard on radio 4 about rape where a woman had been raped by a man she knew at university and her girl friends didn't believe her because he was 'a really nice bloke' and there must have been some 'misunderstanding'.

Shame on you, Portofino and all the other rape-deniers. Your views sicken me

StewieGriffinsMom,

He might have been confused re the pregnancy issue. And, maybe she sometimes said no and it meant yes, depending on the tone. I am NOT saying this is the case but only Anchor and her husband know this. The rest of the board do not. This is not a case of 2 strangers having sex for the first time. Established couples have their own rules and games.

Why do you personally think that he continued? Do you think he wanted to hurt or pleasure his wife? And, to you, does that matter at all. I think, at least, those are fair questions (and I am not presuming any "correct" answer).

as i have stated earlier larry - whilst the marriage can and should probably continue if this was an isolated incident. It is important for both Anchor and her DH to understand just how bad what he did was.

he needs to know that whilst she may well "get over it" and forgive him as she understands thathis intention was not to cause her harm or upset. he needs to understand that that is precisely what he did do.

Anchor is clearly very upset by what has happened to her. there are others on this thread who have also suffered horrificly at the hands of violant and non violant rapists.

can you not see why your posts about an ex girlfriend who was clearly consenting if not particularly outgoing would be offensive and derailing?

can you not see that your persistant posts questioning reasonable consent seemed like childish rantings demanding attention on a subject already covered and perfectly clear.

No one says no when they mean yes. (Why am I engaging in this?)

youare correct, there are silent cues and "games" played in a loving long term relationship.

but given the fact that Anchor has posted, clearly upset about what happened i think this was beyond what would normally happen in their bedroom.

do you not?

It would be funny that this thread had descended into an argument about Larry's educational history, if it wasn't so completely dull. Whether he went to Cambridge or not doesn't actually tell us anything about larry's mindset, intelligence (sorry but it's true, some of the biggest dunces I know went to Oxbridge), or likelihood of raping someone. Engaging in an insensitive and ridiculous discussion about whether his girlfriend participated in sex or not does, however. He was there, it's obviously stuck with him and bringing it up here suggests that he is uncomfortable about how he behaved during that phase of his life. There is a big difference between "participating" (kissing, undressing each other, touching etc) and "just lying there". It's insulting to conflate the two, when "just lying there", with no physical or verbal cues of consent would indicate to any sensible person that sex was not wanted. If that was not the case with you and your girlfriend, and she participated, why lie about her "just lying there" in the first place? Because you want to make an intellectual point on a thread about supporting rape victims?

Well there's nice.

Msrisotto,

How many women have you slept with? I have known women to do the "no,no, no, yes, yes, yes" thing. And, personally, I HAVE ALWAYS checked at that point which they mean and, for the record, it has always been yes. I am not an insensitive beast and am actually quite good at reading non verbal signals. There are more types of females than those who post on this board, across the social, educational and economic spectrum.

Anyway, I am not going to get my point across without being seen here as either a rape apologist or, to some of you, as an actual rapist. This, despite the fact that I have been happily married for 3 years (together for 6), always been a serial monogamist and one of my two best friends is female.

I just have a subtily (although not that) different view to some of you. Subtilty does not play well on MN, though.

"only Anchor and her husband know this" - yes and Anchor has come on here saying that this wasn't part of their usual pattern of behaviour, and he did it when she had said no, moved away and fallen asleep. Three very significant clues that she was not trying to be alluring.

Does anyone else find it offensive as well that Larry came on here and made a joke about his wife "pretending" to enjoy sex?

actually larry i have slept with a number of women.

there is a vast difference between a giggly no get off and "no! please stop"

If you were a rapist (not saying you are, I have no idea), not cheating on your wife, and having a female best friend wouldn't make you any less of a rapist.

Elephants,

I was being self-deprecatory, maybe you missed it.