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.

Larry - if you persisted when a woman was saying no, then shame on you.

Can't be bothered to see who posted this crap but seeing as I am actually married to the man I feel I should have my say:

"some of the dimmest most chauvinistic people I ever met were at Cambridge, Larry fits the bill perfectly."

He is definitely not dim and so far from chauvanistic you have no idea. TBH we think some of you are insufferable bores and a bit thick but neither DH or I would ever mention that in our posts.

"I think you will find women prefer to be asked for consent rather than raped."

Okay, I am imagining a really romantic evening with DH - we have a bottle of wine, dim lights and lovely food. Afterwards I am feeling really horny and things are getting a little interesting. Do I really want DH to say to me "darling is it okay if I have sex with you?" For me it would really ruin the moment.

Lastly, the sort of person that rapes is never going to ask for consent. He will just do it.

Thebossofme,

How about you read my actual post where I explicitly stated that I never persisted. Easier to just have a go without bothering to read it, isn't it?!

Agreed, Larry there is a time and a place and this is not it. This thread has been derailed enough. leave it alone. In case you are unsure, this is a load of women saying NO.

I'm in some sort of nightmare land here - what the hell is going on?

Anchor I hope you are okay.

The only good thing is that I now know which posters are nuts and can avoid having anything to do with them ever again. Sheesh...

I suspect there may be a silent majority who have some sympathy with my points.

However, good luck to Anchor. I hope she finds a solution that makes her happy in the long term.

Bye all.

i have tried to engage and offer you some kind of reasoned debate but now im just going to say fuck off.

if you cannot understand that there is a clear difference between a romantic drink fuelled night where your consent is unspoken as your actions are clear and saying no not tonight dear and falling asleep then there really is no point.

there is no discussion to be had on consent. consent is already clearly defined in law.

if you don't understand where the line is drawn then probably safest for all concerned if you keep it in your pants.

and aligrylls the fact that you feel it more important to defende your husbands honour than to see why it is he has upset so many women with insesetive ramblings is appalling.
I hope you never feel the need to come and discuss your need for support following a traumatic experience

We say no but we mean yes, obviously.

Good riddance.

Ali, your husband has come onto a thread where rape victims are supporting each other and posted a whole series of offensive inappropriate remarks. Don't add to it by making a whole other set of inane irrelevant remarks.

And, no, my husband doesn't ask for consent in the way you outline, but he does ask "OK?" at points during sex. Its called respecting me and my body.

And, larry, you said "I have known women to do the "no,no, no, yes, yes, yes" thing" If you got to the yes yes yes, that means you persisted past the first no (unless they literally said no no no yes yes yes all in one breath.

Why am I engaging with such idiots??? Its the end of the working day here, I'm heading home, but want my last post of the day (I hope) to be to Anchor and any other rape victims to say that I will be thinking of you this weekend, stay strong.

Hi, I've been lurking. Anchor I hope you're ok, and you managed to talk to your DH about it.

StewieGriffinsMum forgive me if I misunderstood your post about people who are drunk or otherwise incapacitated, but I thought in America a woman who can show that she was drunk has a case as the law states that you can't consent while incapacitated. I believe it is the same for drugs. I think in the UK being drunk is no legal benefit to making a case, but is
more likely to hinder a woman's case, with the jury assuming all sorts about a woman who gets drunk We need to get the law changed to US rules, much better.

Secondly and a bit more controversially, I have low libido caused by the Pill and work stress, and often my DH is frustrated, which either upsets or annoys me. Sometimes he makes overtures like cuddling and kissing which I enjoy but then I just want to go to sleep. He often persists for a bit, even when I have verbally said 'not tonight' or 'i'm too tired'. Sometimes - and this is the key - after this - I change my mind due to his superior seduction skills meaning I'm now a bit turned on, or my thinking 'God, we haven't actually done it in ages' decide to go along with it. Then I enjoy it. I don't feel taken advantage of, I like him manipulating me like this, I don't like him occasionally making me feel guilty for not wanting to, I know if I said 'no' firmly and moved away from him he would get the message that it wasn't worth persisting. I'm asking posters to recognise that there is give and take in a long-term sexual relationship, that persuasion does take place, that it's not rape if I change my mind after saying no.

I hope I haven't upset anyone reading or diminished anyone's experiences, that's not my intention, I just want to address the 'no means no' thing in the context of uneven sex drive in a loving relationship.

AliGrylls - you are just as mean as your husband coming on here, trying to ruin a thread that had intended to support Anchor.

Your poor poor poor teenage son.

God help him.

Seems like this thread has grown overnight!

It is funny really, I never thought that my saying words to the effect of: 'I'm sitting on the fence as to whether or not this incident is rape or not. I wasn't there. We haven't heard the husband's side of the story. This is so complicated.' could really attract the scorn it has.
I'm not being disrespectful to Anchor by saying this at all. I'm saying that I don't know, I wasn't there, can't say for certain one way or another.

You know what, those of you who are CERTAIN she has been raped and those of you who are certain she HASN'T been are WRONG.
We do not know. There are two sides to every story.

This rather basic fact seems to have been totally lost here.

I would, however, like to talk in general about this rape issue.
I'd really like an answer to the following question from someone who knows these things, though:
If a man/woman has sex with someone when they genuinely believe the other person was consenting, does this fall under the category of rape?

start a thread marantha

LadyBiscuit - you disgust me. Your language is disgusting and I think you should be ashamed. You have no right to tell people to fuck off, when nothing was said personally against you. Your post is exctremely offensive.

snoozathon - in britain the law states that if you are incapacitated in anyway and are therefore unable to give consent then it must be assumed that consent is denied

so to have sex with a woman so drunk she cannot respond IS RAPE.

As for what happens in your bedroom, if you and your partner are happy with the arrangment that you have then that is fine.

the reason yoru case is different from Anchors is because she clearly wsn't happy with her husband to do that to her and it would seem that what you describe is not a common occurance in their bedroom.

I too noticed larry conflating Anchor with the poster the other day (the pregnancy issue), obviously women who deny their husbands their marital rights are all one to him.

"there are two sides to every story"

Yes indeed. Anchor has no reason to lie and say that she fell asleep, or said no, or moved away, if she actually didn't. What's she got to gain from that? (If you say attention I will scream) Anchor's H on the other hand has a strong motivation to lie and say that he though she had consented, however unreasonable that may appear, to prevent being held responsible for raping her.

I don't think anyone disagrees that Anchors situation was one where her husband is on the wrong. He definitely was. But I think all DH is trying to say is that you have to look at each case on its own merits. Is that such an awful view to have?

"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)"

"I suspect there may be a silent majority who have some sympathy with my points."

As a frequent lurker on this topic I just had to pop up at this point and say, no I certainly do not have sympathy with your points.

I am so grateful for and admiring of the regulars, especially dittany, SGM, edam and isnt who've fought the good fight on this threat.

Quite apart from the appalling attitudes and lack of compassion, one of the really unpleasant things is seeing certain posters with delusions of high-level forensic advocacy skills trying to cross-examine. this isn't the only thread on which it's happened. Amateur George Carmans, please go away.

And marantha, the law is that a person must reasonably believe that the other person consents, so there is an objective element to the test for consent. If you are reckless as to whether someone consents, or your belief in their consent is unreasonable (like some of the delusional bollocks on this thread) then you can be found guilty of rape.

Thread not 'threat'. Though maybe I got it right first time...