Men have done such a number on us that even women don't even know what rape is

[cailindana]

Now I know Judy Finnegan is not a paragon of intellectual prowess.

But still, I would never have thought such stupidity could fall from her lips: www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-29598732

She said the rape was "not violent." So what was it then? Friendly? Enjoyable? Just a little game?

How how how how how do we live in a world where a woman can't recognise the extreme violence of having your body used by another person?

Sorry MyEmpire - but that is still consent. The behaviour she was going to be subjected to for saying no in scenario 2 was no coercive.

I've re read Sabrinas post and I'm sorry you don't agree but it is very much aimed at me, not my opinions!

Well yes MyEmpireOfDirt, it's nothing to do with "regretting a decision" and everything to do with being cajoled / forced / persuaded / coerced into an act that they don't want before, during or after the event.

In am not sure where the concept of "regret" even comes from, apart from the obvious trope that women like to accuse men of rape when they have consensual sex that they regret because, you know, women are nuts and evil.

haven't read whole thread due to obvious answer generated by first post- Judy Finnegan may be an idiot but is very insulting to say that 50% of the planet think the same because 'men have trained us to do so'.

I have my own mind, thank you.

The idea that a man or a boy can use almost any means necessary to get a woman or girl to say "yes" is highly prevalent in our society and extremely corrosive.

In fact, happily, this is recognised to some extent in law these days - coercion is a crime, for instance, and the CPS guidelines encourage prosecutors to take into account matters such as vulnerability, power imbalance and so on, especially when looking at younger people.

As everyone on the thread would know if they could be bothered to look at the links and do a bit of googling, rather than doggedly proceeding on the basis that what they think the law says and does must be what it actually is.

That reminds me a little of the bit upthread where it was posited that is a person believes something to be true, then it must be true...

I've re read Sabrinas post and I'm sorry you don't agree but it is very much aimed at me, not my opinions!

Which part of my post?

specialsubject it is very clear that the OP means Not All Women

you can't use "ad hom" as a get-out clause not to respond to questions about your own arguments

Yes, we do have our own minds. Equally we do not exist in a vacuum.
I understand your points Brighton in that they are valid in loving equal realionships and in encounters where the two participants have a give and take attitude. However It seems prevalent in many
Situations that one has a take and take attitude. For reasons way down inhistory this attitude is most prevalent in men (certainly not all and not restricted to the one gender) and this has spawned myths to justify this mindset and way of behaving, some of which havebeen identified here.

Xpost with Seven, who os more eloquent!

The idea that a man or a boy can use almost any means necessary to get a woman or girl to say "yes" is highly prevalent in our society and extremely corrosive.

Exactly, Seven. For the purposes of the law, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 defines consent as:

a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice.

On Rape, the Act defines "reasonable belief in consent" as:

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.

I'd quite like to know what steps Brighton thinks the man in scenario 2 took to ascertain whether she was consenting. Brighton has already agreed that simply 'stopping fighting him off' does not equal consent.

Id also like to know why anyone would argue that being emotionally bullied, berated and sleep deprived would equate to someone 'agreeing by choice.'

I know I keep harping on about scenario 2, but I think it is so important that it is not seen as socially acceptable to bully women into sex - and call it "consent" when she gives in under duress. She is not making a free choice under these circumstances, she is simply choosing the least worst option. Fearing the consequences of saying 'no' is not consent.

no man is expected to be a mind reader in order to avoid raping a woman, he just needs to ensure she wants sex

I said/implied yes to sex with my dh recently. He stopped before we got anywhere as he said he could tell by my bodily responses that I wasn't in to it.

he isn't a mind-reader.

I think men should only have sex with women that they think want to have sex with them

Wow!! Many men feel that every woman wants sex with them, they are rapists. Your opinion on who men should have sex with is dangerous!

replace 'think' with 'believe' Same thing!!!

Surely if you are telling (blackmailing) someone that you will finish the relationship if they don't have more frequent sex is coercing them into having more frequent sex? Isn't coercion rape?

Different,

To address your last point - are you saying a man if a man feels his sexual needs are not met and he is unhappy his only options are a) more wanking and continuing in an unhappy relationship b) leaving the relationship with out giving his partner a chance to understand why he is not happy?

I can't see a way by your logic that a man can discuss the fact he would like to have a more active sex life with out automatically becoming a rapist?

I don't think anyone wants a law change. I, for one, am interested in challenging rape myths that mean that juries are less likely to accept often ludicrous "reasonable beliefs" about consent.

or c) discuss the situation with his wife without actually touching her? WHy on earth would he just leave without explaining why? Most adults can discuss their views, preferences and objections to any part of their relationship without too much difficulty. But if his wife says she's getting as much sex as she wants and any more would be given reluctantly, then he needs to accept that a) and b) are indeed his only options.

Why do you think this man would be happy if his wife reluctantly provided him with more sex? Because if he is happy about making his wife unhappy as long as he gets more sex, then yes, he is a rapist.

Bloody hell this is depressing. If a mam badgered, pressured a woman to consent to sex then she isn't consenting freely.

If a man is unhappy about the amount of sex in a relationship he can discuss it without putting pressure on. Offer suggestions and ask what will help etc. You can do this without putting pressure on your partner or badgering them for sex.

Not entirely relevant but to give some posters hope! I was discussing the Judy Finnegan comments and the ched Evans case with my 15 yr old son. He was horrified by her comments. In his words rape is rape. He is aghast at the rape myths and apologists. I have discussed enthusiastic consent with him and even at the age of 15 He is aware it is not about a woman not saying no. It's about verbal and non verbal ques and body language. If he can understand this then grown adults should be able to Ffs.

I have four sons and my partner and I are doing our damdest to counteract the culture that they are being raised in. I know we are not the only parents doing this so let's not give up hope for the next generation.

Hi Annie,

I'm not sure where I said this hypothetical man would touch his wife rather than discuss his concerns? He is only a rapist if he has sex with her, with out her consent.

How would you feel about a woman in that scenario thinking 'I didn't realise my partner was so unhappy so I will try to work with him to improve our sex life because I value the relationship and the need of both people in it to be recognised'

Is any sex after that moment basically rape?

Good grief 5madthings, so in your opinion is a man badgers his wife for sex then she isn't actually consenting freely and he is raping her?!