The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Sex and Consent
takyris
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Spawning off the Wikileaks topic:
I'd like to posit a couple of hypothesis and get people's take. I'm going with Guy as initiator because in theory it shouldn't matter, but in reality, the perception is no guy can get raped by a woman ever, that's just surprise sex, wooo bro-fist!
For each of these scenarios, I'd like to offer the following answers:
1) This is Fine
2) This is Sleazy Douchebag Behavior, but I wouldn't consider it a crime
3) This is or Should Be a Crime (or if the area I live doesn't have law covering this, I wish it did)
Scenario 1:
Husband and Wife. Husband and Wife have talked on occasion, and wife has said that on nights when she collapses after long day, husband can totally use her for sex if he wants.
Scenario 2:
Husband and Wife. They've never had this talk. Husband is really thinking he'll wake her up with sex, but she took sinus meds and is out like a light. She doesn't wake up, husband doesn't stop.
Scenario 3:
Husband and Wife. They've never had this talk. Husband knows she's a heavy sleeper or is out on sinus meds and just wants to have sex, so he does it without waking her up.
Scenario 4:
Same as above, except that they're not married, nor do they live together. They're a couple that has been dating monogamously (and sexually active) for a few months, and the girl fell asleep at the guy's house while watching a movie during a night in which sex wasn't discussed as an option.
Scenario 5:
Same as above, except that they're not married, do not live together, and are not a steady couple. They are acquaintances who have hooked up on occasion, and the girl fell asleep at the guy's house after watching a movie with a group -- the group left, she was still there, asleep.
Scenario 6:
Same as #5, but instead of being asleep, she is passed out from a combination of sinus meds and a glass of wine that hit her hard as a result of her head cold.
Scenario 7:
Same as #6, but the couple has never had sex previously -- they are purely friends or acquaintances, part of a social circle.
I'd like to posit a couple of hypothesis and get people's take. I'm going with Guy as initiator because in theory it shouldn't matter, but in reality, the perception is no guy can get raped by a woman ever, that's just surprise sex, wooo bro-fist!
For each of these scenarios, I'd like to offer the following answers:
1) This is Fine
2) This is Sleazy Douchebag Behavior, but I wouldn't consider it a crime
3) This is or Should Be a Crime (or if the area I live doesn't have law covering this, I wish it did)
Scenario 1:
Husband and Wife. Husband and Wife have talked on occasion, and wife has said that on nights when she collapses after long day, husband can totally use her for sex if he wants.
Scenario 2:
Husband and Wife. They've never had this talk. Husband is really thinking he'll wake her up with sex, but she took sinus meds and is out like a light. She doesn't wake up, husband doesn't stop.
Scenario 3:
Husband and Wife. They've never had this talk. Husband knows she's a heavy sleeper or is out on sinus meds and just wants to have sex, so he does it without waking her up.
Scenario 4:
Same as above, except that they're not married, nor do they live together. They're a couple that has been dating monogamously (and sexually active) for a few months, and the girl fell asleep at the guy's house while watching a movie during a night in which sex wasn't discussed as an option.
Scenario 5:
Same as above, except that they're not married, do not live together, and are not a steady couple. They are acquaintances who have hooked up on occasion, and the girl fell asleep at the guy's house after watching a movie with a group -- the group left, she was still there, asleep.
Scenario 6:
Same as #5, but instead of being asleep, she is passed out from a combination of sinus meds and a glass of wine that hit her hard as a result of her head cold.
Scenario 7:
Same as #6, but the couple has never had sex previously -- they are purely friends or acquaintances, part of a social circle.
takyris on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
1 could even be criminal. The point is that the husband can "wake her up with sex", so if he starts going at it and she doesn't wake up, he ought to stop. Even with prior consent, I think it could be a crime, if for no other reason than the wife isn't capable of revoking consent, which I would argue trumps prior consent.
But same as 2 and 3, it would probably be different for different couples.
It's basically rape in all cases, just some of the cases you've suggested have the possibility of a married couple who is into that.
Also, what the law is going to define as consent in a marriage is much more broad then a more casual relationship, as the relationship by its nature indicates at least a passive presence of consent.
I will take a leap of faith with consensual sexual relationships that consent is assumed until a party says stop. If the party is unable to say stop then that's rape. But I find it unnecessary to lump "wake you up with oral" as rape just because it fits the classic definition of not getting consent first. If the person says stop, then stop. Though that's probably going to be wildly unpopular with some more vocal anti-misogynistic people who'd be willing to prosecute people who do such things.
There isnt much room for debate here. Though the actual topic does have some, the questions posed are pretty black and white.
Whats more interesting is date rape. That...sounded bad.
Point is, when is a girl too drunk to consent? If a girl has 2 drinks and is buzzed, is that wrong? What if a girl consents while sober (enough) then gets a bit black out drunk, is that wrong?
Is it wrong to buy drinks for girls to loossen them up to increase your chances? Is it wrong to get them drunk for the same purpose?
NOt really, the OP didn't do a very good job of capturing what was going on in the other thread.
Yeah. The scenarios in the OP are all pretty cut-and-dry, it's just a matter of whether or not the woman A)knows that that is rape or
Anything other than express, undeniable consent given under sound mind to situation number one is rape without any other question end of story.
We have different standards for human beings than property, though.
People were discussing what defines consent in the wikileaks thread. OP has little to do with that.
I personally wouldnt ever do it, but that doesnt make it illegal or even morally subject.
1 is fine, obviously - the woman has given a sort of blanket consent.
2 is somewhere between fine and sleazy, depending on circumstances. Whether or not they've "had a talk", any couple that's been together that long is going to have some idea as to whether that sort of thing would be okay. If the husband genuinely thinks his wife would be fine with that, then I'd say it's good. If he doesn't know for certain, then maybe it's "fine but stupid", or something. There's also the part where he's expecting her to wake up, and expecting her to think, "Oh cool, sex!"
3 is sleazy at best, again depending on precise circumstances.
4 through six ride the line between sleazy and crime, and 7 is obviously a crime.
Not surprisingly, your gradual spectrum of scenarios has a gradual spectrum of moral analyses.
Now, all that said, all but 7 are situations in which it would be very difficult to conclusively prove any wrongdoing on the part of the husband. In most of those cases, consent exists in a hazy nether region between existent and not. 99% of the time, consent is implied rather than outright stated. Most women do not say, "I am hereby consenting to let you put your dick inside me," they just kinda go with it and then voila, sex is being had, and everybody is happy. If we acknowledge that implied consent exists - which we really kind of need to - then we need to make sure we only punish folks in which consent is very strongly not given.
If a woman has had sex with you previously, if indeed it's an ongoing thing, then the default assumption should be that any random instance of sex between them was consensual. If there's disagreement over that fact, then we should investigate as best we can, but in a nation where folks are innocent until proven guilty, we need to recognize that a lot of legitimate crimes are going to be hard to prove, unless the guy flat-out admits to banging a chick he was certain would not approve.
This is especially the case given the ridiculous stigma associated with any sort of vaguely sex-related crime in this country. This is a place where peeing drunkenly onto a public tree can mean you don't get to live within 1000 yards of a school for the rest of your life. Even being dragged into a sexual assault court case can pretty much ruin someone's life, regardless of the jury's findings.
The intent of the OP here seems to be examining the nature of consent. How strict do we want to be in establishing it, as it pertains to sex? And I would say: not terribly strict at all. Short of the obvious cases, like Scenario 7, if two people are arguing about whether or not consent was given, and if there isn't any physical evidence of a struggle or of drugs nefariously administered, I think we need to keep erring on the side of consent having been given.
A second part of me thinks a public service announcement done in the style of the 1950's on this topic apparently needs to be required viewing during sex ed.
The last part of me just wants to start wailing on people with a clueX4. With some nails in it. Rusty nails. Coated in acid. Or Syphilis. Ok half acid, half Syphilis. Plus I should be paid for it. Possibly be given the key to the city. With a parade. We could have floats, and giant banners that say "The man who saved us from the great people who stick their dicks in unconscious people plague of 20 ought 10". We could have children tossing flowers, and a marching band. Someone famous could give a speech. We can sell tickets. Charitable tickets, with the proceeds going to some worthwhile charity. We can auction off my ClueX4, or perhaps encase it in glass and make it the prime exhibit in a museum dedicated in my honor. With a giant statue of me out front next to a plaque. The plaque would serve as a warning, to future generations who didn't get the message. In case of emergencies someone could rise up, break the glass on the case, and take up my Cluex4 like a modern day King Arthur. He could wail into people, and drag them before the plaque so they could read the giant 10 foot tall letters that make out the words.
KEEP YOUR DICK OUT OF UNCONSCIOUS PEOPLE!!!
Seriously? I say, "if I ever go to sleep, I welcome, nay, encourage you to initiate sex with me!" Then you do so, and I wake up and say, "Ha ha, motherfucker, you just raped me!"
Like, this is what you're getting at, here?
See this what people were arguing against in the other thread even in instances of married couples which had me face palming.
Consent is assumed quite often, because not assuming consent assumes guilt.
Mostly because tak changed the wording to mean something different, and, it really just reads as some angry feminist in woman's studies trying to catch us with our pants down, so to speak, and say we all approve of rape.
I wouldn't either. But how would your wife feel?
I'm guessing people are just thinking "PENETRATE HAH!" is the wakeup call you get. But I'd imagine it'd be some heavy foreplay to basically get the person warmed up (woken up gradually) before the act commences. I guess that in of itself is the consent.
As for just using someone's unconscious body, that really is up to the woman if she's one of those "record it so I can watch later" and gets off on it sort of way.
Edit: and the gradual wakeup would fall under assault rather than full blown rape too, so, there's that I guess.
Yeah, those are the only two options. Do you assume that any given instance of sex is rape, and then see if you can prove it's consensual? Or do you assume that any given instance of sex is consensual, and then see if you can prove it's rape?
If you go with the former, then you're going to wind up with the majority of sex in this country being rape. Is that what we're trying to establish, here?
2: Mostly hilarious. Douchebaggery.
3: Seriously, if you can sleep through sex you're not doing it right. Douchebaggery.
4: This is a crime.
5: Again, this is a crime.
6: Crime.
7: Crime.
Not saying my experiences here are the norm or anything more than anecdotal, but I wouldn't really want to just shove my dick inside my sleeping wife. It would be painful for both of us. And then it would hurt again after she slapped me. But even then I doubt she would say I raped her, not in a serious way anyhow.
Let's just go with unless you have explicit permission for sleep sex, you should probably obtain permission first.
This is such a terrifically awful way of looking at things I don't even know where to begin. Especially because the mere process of going to the cops and claiming rape is, in and of itself, generally an indicator that something is amiss.
If a women has had sex with a fella 10 times and not claimed rape, and then the 11th time claims rape, I think it makes more sense to assume that something was different about the 11th time, rather than that the 11th time she suddenly became afraid of being seen as a slut and decided to toss out a rape charge or whatever "what if" argument people throw out there when denying rape.
Like, whenever this comes up there's some sort of weird assumption that a women might cry rape at any time. Which isn't true.
You're significant other is drunk. You want to have sex. She agrees implicitly (you know, in the way drunk people do when they hook up). However, she's drunk. She may be having sex with you when, if she was not drunk, she might have not agreed to.
Is it rape?
The way they identify 'true' rape among women is by asking very gentle questions to probe out rape, rather then outright asking. Like, has a man ever touched your breast without asking? Has a man ever touched your vagina without asking? Stuff like that, so that you can figure out if they were raped without asking outright.
You've also probably heard of a rather famous figure that ~1 in 3 women are raped during college. That figure was arrived at by the careful 'sideways' probing, in order to ask in a non-threatening option in addition to 'have you been raped?' questions because people who have been raped do not want to admit it in any way, shape or form for the most part. Perfectly understandable.
On that jaw-dropping 1 in 3 ladies get the bad touch survey, no men were even asked if they've been raped. The figures for male rape are assumed. Nobody is asking 'has a woman ever touched your penis without asking' because only a weak faggot wouldn't enjoy a woman grasping at his gentleman sausage. And only a weak faggot of a bitch would get raped by their roommate. As you can tell, this shit leaves me livid.
Also Taky, I don't see how the scenarios you've listed follow your previous point that men can't be more then 'surprise sexed' by a woman.
This whole thing about male rape is UUUUGH, like I've seen prominent feminist websites with articles on their main page arguing that it is biologically impossible for a woman to rape a man because an erection is biological consent. I'll leave this massive logic fail for everyone to figure out.
Fuck all the abhorrent motherfuckers who think that male rape is funny, and fuck modern media for having men being raped as a funny joke. Yeah I'm looking at you Wedding Crashers and Get Him To The Greek. Imagine the fucking outrage if a female character got raped in a movie and everyone was like "lol take this hit of druuuugs" and that was as far as it was dealt with.
Depending on local laws, yes. Drunk people (0.08 BAC) cannot consent. That means when I banged my lady friend the other night when we were both four sheets to the wind, we raped each other.
Just so you know guys I've been on both sides of this scenario that's the whole reason I brought it up, although I'd rather not share my own personal experiences in a public forum such as this.
bowen is hitting close to home though...
Is this not ridiculous to you? You raped each other at the same time?
My SO might be more inclined to have sex when she's feeling chipper, or based on a variety of other factors, this doesn't somehow change the fact that she's consenting.
That said, there are various degrees of manipulation, and I would not condone spiking her drink to make her more frisky, for example.
Not entirely sure how to parse this post out to be honest.
Are you arguing that consent should not be assumed until otherwise shown? Because that's the what Jeffe and I are talking about.
Not really, a little skeezy and I certainly wouldn't call you a gentleman for it though.
It happens to people on this forum all the time. If consent is removed because you are drunk, a lot of people here are guilty of rape and have also been raped.
That's consent while sober, but you can, of course, change your mind...?
Basically, this thread makes me never want to go on dates and have sex with women again.
In terms of rape charges? Situation dependent, largely, and physical evidence is way better, but if someone who's never filed a rape charge accuses a fella of rape I am more inclined to believe her, yes, because people don't generally claim those things just for shits.
In terms of the finer points of bedroom policies? I could care less.
*edit* Guys. Guys. The entire point of these laws is to determine consent. You can probably find a bajillion loopholes that make you a rapist. Hell you can go randomly stick your pinky in your spouses' ear and technically call it sexual assault, too. Does it matter? No.
As Robman previously stated -- he raped her. It is impossible for a man to be raped by a woman.
My wife has woken me up with surprise sex on more than one occasion. I have woken her up with surprise sex on more than one occasion.
Do i need to start printing up dated and notarized consent forms to protect us legally? Can third parties make rape charges?
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
College would be nothing but a rape factory every Thursday, Friday and Saturday.
I find that definition really cheapens rape. Which is HORRIBLE and should not be bandied about casually. Kind of why comparing someone to Hitler or Stalin is so over-the-top and facepalm worthy.
Its a judgment call. You can be a little tipsy or mildly drunk and still make a reasonable enough decision regarding consent. If she's falling down drunk or completely out of it then yeah we get into questionable territory.