Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Rape within marriage

1000 replies

tabouleh · 26/08/2010 15:28

Yes unashamedly a thread about a thread.

It is like entering the bloody twilight zone over there. Sad

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.

OP posts:
snoozathon · 27/08/2010 16:24

Tabouleh just say sorry fgs, you're not coming across well, it makes me grit my teeth when people say 'well I'm right, but sorry if you feel like x, but I'm right really'

Butterfly, I'm just frustrated at some of the silliness in the thread and the lack of debate! I'm new to this board but post on other femi sites. I'll hang around for future debates.

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 27/08/2010 16:25

Snoozathon - yes xposts, but in what way am I being rude? I really feel that you are talking down to me.

You've already asked if I think all sex is rape, FGS! What on earth gives you the idea that I think that, or that I fail to understand that men mostly want to give their partners pleasure, or that people sometimes do things sexually primarily for the pleasure of their partners and not themselves? Have I said something to imply that I am not aware of this? Do you think I live in a convent or am untouched by the Hand of Man?

I think this conversation is about rape, not consensual sex, and giving me a quiz about my own knowledge about consensual sex is bizarre and intrusive. It pretty much invites me to start talking about my own sex life, which I am certainly not about to do. You obviously have me down as some kind of man-hating extremist and I really don't know why that is, perhaps you could explain?

tabouleh · 27/08/2010 16:25

marantha I do not know which "we" you are questioning. If it relates to sleepless nights then go search the thread.

If it is not then "we" probably meant "me and anyone who agrees with me"?

OP posts:
SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:27

taboleuh Yes, you have offended me. If one of your DCs end up in a coma, please feek free to come back and we can discuss whether it's just like them sleeping?

TheButterflyEffect · 27/08/2010 16:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Prolesworth · 27/08/2010 16:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

tabouleh · 27/08/2010 16:30

snoozathon "Tabouleh just say sorry fgs" - you must have cross posted with my post of 16:22:17

I hope you will also be requesting that other posters who have upset people like Anchor should say sorry?

OP posts:
ElephantsAndMiasmas · 27/08/2010 16:30

Sassy - it wasn't my analogy, I was referring to the law which was posted above, which includes various situations where it is "unreasonable" by definition to think that someone consents to sex:

"(d)the complainant was asleep or otherwise unconscious at the time of the relevant act;

(e)because of the complainant?s physical disability, the complainant would not have been able at the time of the relevant act to communicate to the defendant whether the complainant consented;"

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:32

I'd have to flick through the thread to find the references.....

I think the problem is this - we all accept that there can be rape in marriage. There are lots of circumstances in which we would all agree it was rape, I am sure.

However, relationships are complicated, and various posters would draw lines in different places.

snoozathon · 27/08/2010 16:33

OK E&S I'm sorry for asking if you believed all sex is rape, I was being flippant. I'm also sorry if you feel I was talking down to you.

The thread is about rape in marriage, you're right. It's relevant to talk about sexual problems within marriage surely? Anchor said she had low libido and depression, imo this is a large part of the story too and you're ignoring these parts and just repeatedly saying that all rape is the same. She also raised issues about sexual communication - she often started to enjoy herself after the act had begun (although I believe on this occasion she verbalised 'no' which her DH didn't accept/hear/whatever). You don't need to post anything personal but I feel you are just exaggerating posters' views who are presenting more subtle viewpoints than you.

I don't think anyone's disputing that Anchor's situation was rape or that rape within marriage exists, so can we have a productive coversation about it?

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:35

E&M which section of the act are you quoting?

snoozathon · 27/08/2010 16:35

I'm not new to MN, but new to this particular board.

tabouleh · 27/08/2010 16:39

SassySusan did you mean to post "If one of your DCs end up in a coma" really - did you?

E&M posted:

"Having sex with your sleeping partner, just like having sex with your drunk-to-passed-out partner, or your in-a-coma partner, is rape or assault."

This was a factual statement.

Just because having sex with a sleeping partner = rape and

having sex with someone who is drunk or in a coma = rape

does not mean that E&M or anyone is saying that

Being asleep is the same as being in a coma.

I will see how the thread pans out but personally I will not be enaging further with you as the thread is not about you.

OP posts:
ElephantsAndMiasmas · 27/08/2010 16:40

I think i'll just repost vesuvia's post:

"...I thought it would be helpful to actually quote a bit more of part 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, because it not only defines rape but also defines consent.

section 1 Rape

(1)A person (A) commits an offence if?

(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and

(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

(2)Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.

(3)Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section.

(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

section 74 Consent

For the purposes of this Part, a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice.

section 75 Evidential presumptions about consent

(1)If in proceedings for an offence to which this section applies it is proved?

(a)that the defendant did the relevant act,

(b)that any of the circumstances specified in subsection (2) existed, and

(c)that the defendant knew that those circumstances existed,

the complainant is to be taken not to have consented to the relevant act unless sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue as to whether he consented, and the defendant is to be taken not to have reasonably believed that the complainant consented unless sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue as to whether he reasonably believed it.

(2)The circumstances are that?

(a)any person was, at the time of the relevant act or immediately before it began, using violence against the complainant or causing the complainant to fear that immediate violence would be used against him;

(b)any person was, at the time of the relevant act or immediately before it began, causing the complainant to fear that violence was being used, or that immediate violence would be used, against another person;

(c)the complainant was, and the defendant was not, unlawfully detained at the time of the relevant act;

(d)the complainant was asleep or otherwise unconscious at the time of the relevant act;

(e)because of the complainant?s physical disability, the complainant would not have been able at the time of the relevant act to communicate to the defendant whether the complainant consented;

(f)any person had administered to or caused to be taken by the complainant, without the complainant?s consent, a substance which, having regard to when it was administered or taken, was capable of causing or enabling the complainant to be stupefied or overpowered at the time of the relevant act.

(3)In subsection (2)(a) and (b), the reference to the time immediately before the relevant act began is, in the case of an act which is one of a continuous series of sexual activities, a reference to the time immediately before the first sexual activity began.

section 76 Conclusive presumptions about consent

(1)If in proceedings for an offence to which this section applies it is proved that the defendant did the relevant act and that any of the circumstances specified in subsection (2) existed, it is to be conclusively presumed?

(a)that the complainant did not consent to the relevant act, and

(b)that the defendant did not believe that the complainant consented to the relevant act.

(2)The circumstances are that?

(a)the defendant intentionally deceived the complainant as to the nature or purpose of the relevant act;

(b)the defendant intentionally induced the complainant to consent to the relevant act by impersonating a person known personally to the complainant."

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:43

Ok, I found it section 75 - I'm not clear that you have the correct interpration..

Section 1 (2) ("2)Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents"

Section 75 sets out relevant considerations, but it doesn't preclude other consierations being relevant. Section 2 explicitly details taht "all the circumstances" are taken into account.

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 27/08/2010 16:46

Thanks for apologising, snoozathon.

"she often started to enjoy herself after the act had begun" - NO that's incorrect, she has repeated ad nauseam that she often started to enjoy herself when he started to touch/kiss her etc. NOT when he actually stuck his penis in her. The poor woman has said this countless times, read the thread before you start posting massive inaccuracies like that.

In general (NOT talking about this case) of course I agree that sometimes people do get confused, or do not communicate well, and situations result that are uncomfortable - may even fit the legal definition of rape - but where it is obvious where the confusion occurred, and importantly the "guilty" partner recognises that what they did was wrong, and together the couple come up with a good way to continue without this happening again.

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 27/08/2010 16:49

Sassy, it basically says that if any of those situations apply, then everyone should feel free to think the accused is talking bollocks about believing consent was given, unless he can produce bloody good evidence to support his view.

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:50

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:52

E&M I would say that the context of a loving relationship, not where one party was drugged or in a coma (WTF) is probably reasonably good evidence.

Prolesworth · 27/08/2010 16:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 16:58

Yes, butyou have to establish a principle, other people - you can't make what is illegal or immoral as you go along, other wise you have no basis on which to act yourself prolesworth

When I posted my scenario, a number of posters said I had raped my DH. Presumably if he had enjoyed it, instead of telling me to get off, it wouldn't have been rape?

tabouleh · 27/08/2010 16:58

look Sassy I know I said I wouldn't engage further with you but that was before I saw your post saying that I am "too vile to apologise".

At 16:22:17 I posted:

"Look Sassy of course I am sorry for your loss but I do not think I have been horrible nasty or cruel. If you have interpreted my posts that way then I am genuinely sorry."

I would like an apology for:

"If one of your DCs end up in a coma, please feek free to come back and we can discuss whether it's just like them sleeping?"

and

"I am sorry you are too thick to understand why that might offend - and too vile to apologise. Now just trot off back under your bridge, there's a dear."

OP posts:
Prolesworth · 27/08/2010 17:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

SassySusan · 27/08/2010 17:05

I meant one has to establish a principle of what is reasonable prior to doing it - rather than seeing whether it ends up in court or not...

StewieGriffinsMom · 27/08/2010 17:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread