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.

But by the time you got here, marantha, Anchor was posting here - which you were well aware of, because your posts were directed to her by name.

So it was obvious that it was NOT the dispassionate hypothetical debate you claim you wanted.

So you could have set up your own thread for this purpose, since this was already a safe haven for Anchor, but you chose not to. You chose to stay here and hassle her.

And Marantha how DARE you say that Anchor has not been respectful.

Puke, Puke, Puke!

and suppose instead of support! oops.

It doesn't exactly encourage one to get involved in debating feminist issues on MN either

I thought the low point was when Larry said that rape in marriage wasn't the same as stranger rape, because the woman wouldn't be frightened or in physical danger (WTF!)

Then why not fuck off when you see it IS about peoples real lifes problems. And i think youll struggle to have a disspassionate discussion about rape with anyone.
Thinking you were going to get that here, when it was clear that this thread was to support Anchor was a bit ridiculous.

sleepypjs I think your posts are rather aggressive. Surely the point of an internet forum is to debate views - but if as soon as someone disagrees with you, you start shouting abuse at them, it's hardly going to be productive, is it?

you disagree with larry, presumably?

dignified to be fair - I'm confused - there is nothing in the op that suggests this is a support thread. I thought the support thread for Anchor was elsewhere, but she deleted it?

Sassy -how so?

sleepypjs I'd get to the loo if I were you, what with all that puking.

Funny isn't it, how a lot of the ladies here claim to be feminists in support of women but will not for one second consider that a woman who says, 'look I did not follow so-and-so over here' may actually be telling the truth?
If this is feminism, you can keep it.

There isnt no, but it is easy to see that the bulk of the messages were in support of Anchor and for the way she was treated on the other thread. Clearly unpleasant and ignoring statements about Anchor or rape in general was going to provoke strong feelings wasnt it.

I read helping as supporting, Tabouleh has confirmed this in her recent posts?

"there is nothing in the op that suggests this is a support thread"

I would hope that Mners would ALWAYS be supportive to someone who posts about rape, regardless of whether the thread is explicitly a "support thread".

Yeah, sassysusan why was the original thread deleted.
I can only assume,
a, MN thought it to be a touchy subject and thus removed it.

b, Anchor herself asked it to be removed, which begs the question: why continue the issue on a new thread?

See I find the quote below from Marantha very hard to reconcile with the opening post of this thread, and even if she had posted without reading the opening post..she has admitted to reading the header, then there is a disconnect....she would have quickly realised that this thread was about Anchor and would have left. However, if she wanted to be insulting about Anchor and women then she may have chosen to post. She has shown no empathy to Anchor so I believe the latter. I believe she knew exactly what she was doing and does not like being called on it.

marantha Fri 27-Aug-10 17:45:55
Anchor no offence here but I did not follow you over here. That is bullshit.
The thread is entitled 'Rape within marriage', NOT, 'A continutation of *Anchor's thread that was pulled earlier'.

I admit that your problem got me interested in the subject, but to be honest, I actually did not realise that this thread was going to be about you specifically.

I thought: Anchor's thread is too controversial, MN has pulled it, she has left, this Rape Within Marriage thread will just be people generally talking about the subject.

marantha - I can see that you're upset that people are saying you followed Anchor over here.

I believe you!

But - you didn't believe Anchor did you?!

Well, sleepypjs you're wrong.
Go back to puking.
The truth is the only women I feel like being insulting to on this thread is you and tabouleh.

I honestly don't know why people are behaving like this. It feels like some people really dislike Anchor, dislike anyone who is willing to stand up for her, and just post in order to claim that people's experiences of rape aren't real or aren't all that serious.

Why?

Somehow me posting about rape law has led to being accused of "thinking all sex is rape" (although snooz has now apologised). And I'm one of the lucky women who hasn't been raped (yet). I can't imagine how some of the other posters must be feeling :(

I just dont get it at all. I never go on the books / pets / pregnancy/ employment section, im not interested and i just dont give a shit.

Why go and post somewhere when you KNOW your opinions will be in the minority , KNOW they are highly likeley to cause offence ? I disagree with lots of things , yet i dont go there and post knowing my veiws will upset people.

Your in the minority by a long shot, you will not change other peopes veiws on how they perceive the situation and its foolish to try. Is it really likeley considering the amount of posts here that your right and EVERYONE ELSE is wrong, including the legal system ?

And in the middle of this sickening shit, Anchor has been forgotton about , the fact she would like to discuss what to do next, forgotton about.

See if one thought this Rape Within Marriage thread would just be people generally talking about the subject then why would one post the following, referring to a previous thread? Awfully odd.

marantha Thu 26-Aug-10 18:22:49

TheButterflyEffect Please correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall that before other thread was pulled, you said that part of the definition of rape is that it could be shown that the accused KNEW that the accuser didn't wish sex but did it anyway?

Now given that only 7% of communication is verbal, that means that 93% isn't, we can't just disregard that 93% as if it doesn't exist.

x-post dignified. Totally agree (except about the Books section, I likes books)

I always think that those people who are so determined to make excuses for men when it comes to to consent do men a terrible injustice too.

After what happened to me I found sex very difficult and would often freeze up with fear when being intimate. And you know what, shock, horror but the men I did that with stopped. It wasn't rocket science. It would have been easy for them to keep going, I would not have resisted but they could obviously see that all was not well. Many men out there do get it which makes it weird to me when I see others so desperate to make excuses for those who choose not to. What is so outrageous about a woman having the right over her own body all of the time regardless of the situation?

tabouleh , it's not that I didn't believe Anchor at all, that is not true, just that I'd like to sit on the fence over whether or not this was actual rape or not, without knowing ALL the details.

That is NOT the same as disbelieving her.
You know, if I'd said to her 'You're lying. Your husband should have sex whenever he wants'
I would completely understand the negativity towards me, but I didn't, say that. Only that she should have a heartfelt discussion with her hubby. Only they know at the end of the day, not us.

So what can we do to help Anchor?

A new thread "Rape in Marriage:discuss" and one called "Support for Anchor"

Actually it may be worth asking MN for a rape support board which would not appear in ACTIVE conversations. This would be similar to SN. So it's there - people can be directed to it and we could have a policy of ignoring unhelpful posts and directing them to a debate thread here say?

Thoughts?

I like that idea, I don't think it is safe for survivors to post here as things are. Too much potential for damage.