• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Implied consent in marriage

I agree, but that doesn't really touch on the topic. One would hope that by the time you marry it's a regular intimate relationship. KNowing your cues is still not an excuse for not getting consent though is it? Would you let a man get away with the excuse of cues? "I didn't rape her. She was giving me all the cues. Her dress, her flirting, nuzzling up to me. She never said 'no' or 'stop', for which I would have stopped." Serious? You would let that go?
If he didnt notice the non-verbal clues I would push away and then say either stop/no if he didn't get that message. if I needed to say NO I would reconsider the relationship because he didn't respect me.
 
Why not? Can not two people get to know each other that they need not be explicit in expressing their consent? Thus the consent is implicit or implied? Who are you to tell me that I can not have implied consent with my wives and GF's?
I think the issue is with using the term "implied consent" given the implications (no pun intended) surrounding that term. I think it would be better to distinguish the unique situation of a happy relationship, maybe "pre-agreed consent". After all, even if you have the freedom to engage in certain sexual acts in certain circumstances with your partner without them explicitly consenting, there could still be other sexual acts or circumstance that you haven't previously discussed or considered and therefore you can't assume you have implicit consent for just because you're in a sexual relationship.
 
The question before you is, is there an implied consent to sex when a couple enters into marriage. This is intended to be in both directions, so anyone who only takes it in the direct of the woman is trolling, especially since this question also applies to same sex marriages.

Now with this question, comes the understanding that if there is such an implied consent, either party can withdraw it at any time. "not tonight, dear" is a valid withdrawal of consent. "You've pissed me off! It'll be a month before I will want sex with you" is a valid withdrawal of consent.

The question of implied consent is not supposed to indicate that either party can't withdrawal consent, but that neither party needs to seek consent each and every time for each activity. This also assumes that no other specified conditions were agreed upon. Naturally, if one says that the other has to ask prior every time and the other accepts that, sure. But outside of agreed upon conditions, does the implied consent exist?
I've heard and read that the two biggest causes of divorce are money, and sex. When there are problems in either it's generally going to get worse before it gets better. Generally speaking not enough of one or the other or both makes a rocky road.
It you entered into marraige and didn't think sex was in the bargain you are very foolish, and if you thought you could live on love alone, you are equally dumb.
 
Why not? Can not two people get to know each other that they need not be explicit in expressing their consent? Thus the consent is implicit or implied? Who are you to tell me that I can not have implied consent with my wives and GF's?
My only statement is consent is not implied. It is never simply understood. If you and your partner are intimate, trusting and have good non-verbal communication, you might be able to signal consent without phonemes, but that is in no way tantamount to implicit, tacit or innate consent.
 
The question before you is, is there an implied consent to sex when a couple enters into marriage. This is intended to be in both directions, so anyone who only takes it in the direct of the woman is trolling, especially since this question also applies to same sex marriages.

Now with this question, comes the understanding that if there is such an implied consent, either party can withdraw it at any time. "not tonight, dear" is a valid withdrawal of consent. "You've pissed me off! It'll be a month before I will want sex with you" is a valid withdrawal of consent.

The question of implied consent is not supposed to indicate that either party can't withdrawal consent, but that neither party needs to seek consent each and every time for each activity. This also assumes that no other specified conditions were agreed upon. Naturally, if one says that the other has to ask prior every time and the other accepts that, sure. But outside of agreed upon conditions, does the implied consent exist?
Nope, obviously - but if couples start refusing to have sex with each other at all then that's potential grounds for divorce - just as is a spouse being unable to have any children of their own and not disclosing this before marriage.
 
Not according to the ones who are making the claims. One woman was at a protest nude save for shorts and tape over her nipples (and maybe shoes) with the words on her torso, "Still not asking for it".



What part of her still not asking for it is too difficult for you to understand?
 
But the question is not whether or not sex happened. It's whether the consent is there or not. The consent can be present and the sex never happens. These are two different things. It could be that he consents to sex when she asks, but does nothing active and just lays there for her to straddle and get her rocks off. She doesn't bother because he's not working with her. Consent present, sex not happening.
Regardless of whether person reaches climax (or get their rocks off) the act of sex is having sex.
I did say it was an old joke but it is a lawyers old joke that it is a truism. The difference between rape and consent is but one word, yes.
What you have just described is not rape, it is consent. I would think the couple in question should have a long conversation. Or never meet again.
 
Not according to the ones who are making the claims. One woman was at a protest nude save for shorts and tape over her nipples (and maybe shoes) with the words on her torso, "Still not asking for it".


Her message here, to me, has more to do with the stigma of women and provocative clothing.

As a married man, I can tell, without the use of words, if my wife is down for some sex, or not. Over 70% of human communication is non verbal. Plenty of times, I've "put the moves" on my wife, only to stop due to the realization that she wasn't interested in sex. And frankly, the same has happened from her to me, too. It's just that men have a much better indicator, lol. All without ever saying yes, or no.
 
Back
Top Bottom