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)