"A quarter of uk adults think that marital sex without consent is not rape."

[Tackytriceratops]

Article.

Fucking hell.

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/06/quarter-of-adults-think-marital-sex-without-consent-is-not-uk-survey-finds?CMP=fb_gu

Seems a bit like necrophilia to me, wanting to "intimately touch" people who're unconscious and thus incapable of consenting or participating in any way. I would prefer that anyone like that maintain at least a 10 foot distance from me at all times, which would make being in a relationship a bit challenging.

I understand exactly what rape is. But lately, the media has been obsessed with sexual assaults.

If you define rape as penetration without consent, then it absolutely clear cut, isn't it?

But "rape" is such an emotive word. Did the people responding to the survey understand the legal denifition of the offence, or were they referring to their own understanding of the word.

For example, most people would agree that a woman who was jogging through a park and subsequently attacked by a stranger, beaten and seriously sexually assaulted was "raped". But when they as asked to consider the possibility that a husband having sex with his drunk wife, was guilty to the same level of culpability as the stranger in the park, most can't reconcile the two. That's the problem. It's not a misunderstanding of what the word rape means. It's the idea that all men are guilty to the same degree, regardless of circumstances.

I just don't think that most people are oblivious to the subtleties of human behaviour. And consequently are reluctant to label all "rapes" as "rapes" in the true sense of the word. I.E the stranger in the park v a couple in an intimate relationship.

Even as women, we don't always agree on what is/isn't abuse.

As neither a cult nor The Borg, there will always be difference of opinion. However, I think the law is (belatedly) quite clear on the issue of consent and sleep/unconsciousness albeit it isn't playing out that way in the courts. And the survey statistics might be pointing to some reasons as to why that is true while simultaneously highlighting some interesting generational differences.

As for the depiction of securing consent for sexual activity - it's like reading a re-write of Frank Furedi's Teaching consent, policing intimacy: Consent classes turn relationships into business transactions

The most striking example of the formalisation of consent is the idea of affirmative consent. Known in America as ‘yes means yes’ laws, affirmative consent demands that consent be explicitly expressed at every stage of a sexual encounter. From this perspective, the usual interactions associated with romantic and sexual encounters – eye contact, body language and other non-verbal signals – are no longer sufficient to signal consent. Instead, affirmative consent is arrived at through modes of engagement more typical of the business world than the bedroom.

www.spiked-online.com/2015/10/27/teaching-consent-policing-intimacy/

Furedi enjoys his turn of phrase too much to examine wider context and commonsense at times. Yes, there are differences for exchanges/relationships of different duration. In longer relationships, there are typically ground rules that can be revisited depending on circumstances and context. As for shorter transactions/relationships - I'm still pro the adults involved being in a sufficiently aware/conscious state to understand what's happening and engage in whatever prophylactic practices suit their needs. And, prophylaxis in this case might also involve avoiding unwanted contact or harm.

As a general note, sexual and fertility coercion are part of an overall pattern of coercive control in relationships that have that abusive dynamic.

If we could arrange for a group vomit receptacle that would be great, looks like we're going to need it.

How is suggesting that consent is implied within the confines of an intimate relationship "rapey"?

If a strange man touches my backside while im out shopping is that an assault?

Of course it is!

If my husband does it, to me, its fine, I like it. I don't expect him to ask permission first!

Whats so difficult to understand about that?

Nope, not engaging any further. @MNHQ could you deal with this one, please?

If people all over the country were inadvertently committing any other serious crime in large numbers because they were literally unaware it was against the law, I wonder what the government response would be?

Good question. I assume that something would be done.

It is also a very interesting statistic because if people don't think it is a crime, isn't it very likely that the men are doing it? I think most people tend to assume that things they consider morally wrong are illegal. Also, using the word "rape" is a moral judgement. Even a person unaware that marital rape is illegal would use the word rape if they thought it wrong.

Likewise, a woman would be inclined to consider marital rape rape if it never happened to her - but would have more reason to consider it not so bad if her husband did it and she has to justify staying with him.

So this is grim ... not just because those people might sit on juries.

Whowoudathunkit you are suggesting that consent is permanent when in a relationship.

It isn't.

Or, to put it another way - my friend was raped by her husband whilst in early labour.

He got her pregnant during consensual sex so by your reasoning he could have assumed she liked it.

Or, to put it another way - my friend was raped by her husband whilst in early labour

How absolutely horrid! Did she manage to get a divorce and never have to see him again? Sorry, off topic, but I so hope she's okay.

No, she didn't get away Hestia. She is still with him and he continues to rape her pretty much daily.

She says there's no point going to the police as he won't get convicted.

Sadly she is probably right.

And who wouldathunkit fuck of with your ridiculous "it's worse/ he's more guilty if it's a stranger in a park" comments.

Imagine raping the mother of your own children and keeping her stuck in a situation where she cannot escape because she is financially reliant on him and scared he will harm the kids if you leave him.

And then some fuckwit on MN declare that he wasn't all that guilty really, because there are different degrees don't you know.

I didn't say it was worse. I said that people have difficulty reconciling the two. And that's possibly why the OPs stats are the way they are.

In that case I apologise for misintepreting your words.

I found your posts very hard to interpret due to phrasing such as:

"I just don't think that most people are oblivious to the subtleties of human behaviour."

What was that sentence supposed to mean?

No, she didn't get away Hestia. She is still with him and he continues to rape her pretty much daily.

In that case I hope ... well it is pretty obvious what I hope for, but probably not allowed to write on a forum.

This is very depressing but doesn't surprise me. I was involved in a similar research project a few years ago with similar results on attitudes to the harm caused by rape and belief in rape myths:

www2.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00489760.pdf

(It's quite a long and stats heavy report but there's a summary on the findings on attitudes to sexual violence on pages 5 - 6. Also it's just on Scotland).

This also replicated the finding that younger people appear to be much more clued up about consent. Melanippe above questions whether this is a genuine improvement or people changing as they age - the data can't show either way but my hunch is that there is a generational difference that'll be maintained as younger people grow up. Let's hope so!

my hunch is that there is a generational difference that'll be maintained as younger people grow up.

Yes, it will be interesting to track this. Given how much peer pressure around sex that young people are exposed to, I found the difference to be encouraging. I'd hope for even more of a shift if and when better, more comprehensive and useful PSHE is introduced into the school curriculum (I'm referring to the recent consultation around PSHE in England and maybe Wales).

My DH died in 1991, so for our entire married life, marital rape was completely legal in the U.K.
The survey results might simply reflect my age group’s opinions not having caught up with the change in the law.
To be honest, I think it would be rather impractical and very unspontaneous if wives and husbands had to negotiate consent forms every time they wanted a cuddle or a shag. Presumably one marries a partner with the specific intention of shagging them?
My DH and I adored each other, and would often wake each other up with intimate caresses intended to lead to sex.
I think that is a world away from an abusive partner forcing their attentions on an actively unwilling victim. When you love and fancy each other to bits, surely you can assume consent is implied unless told otherwise? DH would of course have stopped immediately if I wasn’t in the mood.

I had a conversation with a relative not too long ago and I was horrified at the attitude they had towards rape in marriage. I think it was an older generation thing, because this person got married way before rape in marriage was illegal. She just did not think it was possible for a woman in a relationship to be raped. It wasn't a conscious, deliberate thing, she just had this overriding conviction that if you are in a relationship, you have already signed on the dotted line of availability. I challenged her as politely, but directly as I could, but it just seemed 'obvious' to her that a relationship implied access. Active consent was a completely opaque concept.

"To be honest, I think it would be rather impractical and very unspontaneous if wives and husbands had to negotiate consent forms every time they wanted a cuddle or a shag. "

"Consent forms"? Did someone suggest paperwork was necessary or are you just building yourself a straw man argument there?

The problem with rape is that it is both s legal term and a word in general. I’m sure that there are many who believe that, in its common sense, that isn’t rape. Just as people believe that sleeping with someone with obtain consent first is rape. As a moral judgement that’s fine but it is legally incorrect. The problem with surveys like this is that participants may misunderstand the question so they may be thinking of it in terms of a moral question as opposed to a legal one.

@Quentin the judge directs the jury about what constitutes rape, reasonable belief etc before they go off to make their verdict.

"Presumably one marries a partner with the specific intention of shagging them?"

Not when I don't want to.

Right now I'm drinking wine while he watches Die Hard. I don't want to shag him now and our marriage certificate doesn't impel me to.

@babdoc you can have sex that is not rape without obtaining consent. So long as the other party does consent (even if you don’t know or believe that) it cannot be rape. So if you and your husband were happy with this kind of arrangement and willing then it isn’t rape.

If I had thought that marriage implied permanently waiving my right to not consent in any given instance I'd never have gotten married. What a repulsive idea.

Nope, not engaging any further. @MNHQ could you deal with this one, please?

I concur. Please don't give this... person Kleenex ammunition.