Grey area?
GREY AREA? Are you a fucking psychopath?
Suppose someone invites you to their house for a meal, and then a few hours later you're hungry again. Would it be acceptable to let yourself in and raid the pantry? Would it even be a grey area?
If you're in bed next to a sleeping person, in what world would it be even vaguely morally or legally permissible to start having sex with him or her, on the grounds that he or she was willing in the past?
Honestly, now: do you really think that it's a grey area?
And if she resigned herself to it - do you really think that that makes it OK? Suppose someone threatens you with a broken bottle unless you hand over your wallet. You resign yourself to the loss of the wallet, and go along with the demand in order to avoid getting injured. Have you been less robbed? I doubt it. Now suppose that someone confronts a woman with a broken bottle and demands sex. Again, she might decide to let him have sex with her because, all things considered, that'd be better than being glassed. Now, if the robbery was still robbery (and I'd contend that it was), doesn't this imply that this would still be rape? (Again, I'd contend that it would.) And if it's still rape, then it must be so in spite of the woman having resigned herself to it. Your claim amounts to the idea that it's impossible to be raped if resistance would be futile or counterproductive.
And that's idiotic.
I mean: I don't want to come across all righteous anger... but you really are a complete and utter moral failure if you honestly adhere to the claims you've just made.
EDIT: I'm clearly concentrating on the moral aspect of the claim. Legally, you're just flat out wrong.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:42,
Reply)
Shit, I've done it loads of times
never been accused of rape, never had a problem at all.
am I actually some sort of mass rapist?
(, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:51, Reply)
www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/12/13/the-bogus-julian-assange-rape-case-hurts-women.html
(
dazbrilliantwhites has been meaning to change this..., Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:52,
Reply)
...
...a partner has every right to disengage at any time and have their decision respected. That I think is the most important thing.
If she didn't want the act to continue but lay there and didn't do or say anything to imply that she wanted him to stop, how was he meant to know?
Can you honestly say you've gotten explicit verbal or written consent from a partner every time you've had sex or engaged in a sexual act?
Those things considered, grey area. If she wasn't willing and made it apparent through either action or verbalisation, then he's a rapist. No question.
Otherwise, grey area.
As for the food analogy, If i'd invited someone to my house and made them dinner and told them to make themselves at home, I'd have no problem with them getting a drink or getting something else to eat. As long as they didn't take the piss.
I'm off to pick up my fiance, who I'm pretty sure i've never raped. I'll ask her...
(, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:56, Reply)
The explicit consent thing is a complete red herring.
It doesn't warrant a response.
As for not giving an explicit indication that she wanted him to stop: well, explicit indications can't be the whole story (otherwise we're back to saying that women who keep quiet for the sake of avoiding something worse haven't actually been raped).
Look: I'm not completely familiar with Swedish rape law. But it doesn't seem to have stopped Swedish people having sex.
And the food analogy isn't as easily overturned as you suggest. At the outside, all your response shows is that it might be possible for a person to be OK with the idea of another having sex with her in her sleep. I'll concede that (though your claim here undermines your previous notion that consent has to be explicit). But the fact that it's possible doesn't mean that it's even vaguely legitimate to assume that there's this kind of ongoing consent; and there're big questions that remain. I mean: isn't it more reasonable to assume that, in situations of nothing explicit being said, a sleeping person is not a suitable sexual partner?
The opposite seems to amount to the idea that a man is entitled to sex with someone just on the grounds that he's had sex with her in the recent past. And that, just in case I've not been clear, is nuts.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:06,
Reply)
I mostly agree...
...If she'd woken up and decided she liked it and carried on, it's not rape anymore. Merely someone being kinky. It's that I struggle with and, perhaps unwisely, labelled a 'grey area'.
And to be clear, I am not suggesting sexually assaulting passed out/unconcious/automatically assuming sleeping women are up for it is acceptable. It's clearly not.
Anyways, really have to go now...
(, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:13, Reply)
...
... it's not rape anymore. Yes it is. Legally it is, and morally it is, precisely because one person started having sex with another without that other's even knowing about it, let alone going along with it.
How dumb do you have to be, or with what sense of entitlement, not to see that?
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:23,
Reply)
Then we are all rapists it would appear.
Let's all hand ourselves in.
(, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 20:33, Reply)
Good grief, you're pathetic.
Just for reference: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1
And as for the non-legal aspect of your claim: you seem to be sugggesting that it might be permissible to start having sex with someone in her sleep on the off-chance that she thinks that that's a good idea if and when she wakes up. If you genuinely do think that, you're utterly beneath contempt.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 21:18,
Reply)
That's not what i'm saying at all...
...maybe i'm not explaining myself correctly, maybe you're just seeking out things to critisize. You've certainly ignored things i've said and jumped to your own conclusions about others.
Your link is interesting. Especially 1 (2).
Since you're incapable of debating without resorting to personal insults and debasements, goodnight.
And in case you're not sure, i'm not in favour of or support any kind of rape.
(, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 21:52, Reply)
If someone starts having sex with someone
who is asleep, surely they have no idea whether that person will be willing or not until it is too late?
(
monkeon schmonkeon, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:09,
Reply)
i think human sexual behaviour is a lot more complicated than you make out
the one form of behaviour that very seldom occurs in your scenario is someone turning the lights on, waking the partner up, somehow assessing if their partner is able to give informed consent, then asking for and receiving informed verbal consent (or written consent to have sex just to make sure there are no misunderstandings).
The english law has a sensible test of "reasonable expectation" which the jury can basically apply community norms about what is acceptable behaviour based on the circumstances, while the Swedish law doesn't and is in my opinion flawed in favour of the accuser.
(
cumquat may will not be commenting further on the allegations, Tue 21 Aug 2012, 23:21,
Reply)