Marital rape?

[Aunt Spiker]

It's still rape.

But this does address another problem when it comes to men being raped by women. There is a social stigma because the man is now known for not being able to have overcome his female rapist. That would have to be pretty emasculating. But given that same situation (the guy in the hotel room), but the roles reversed, the man telling the woman she couldn't leave until she had sex with him an indefinite amount of time, until she finally was able to call the cops, there would be little question of it being rape.

Yes - society encourages the stigmas and the stereotypes to the point where it's funny if a guy's in the situation but twisted if a woman is?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Rogue, with all due respect to you..I think men claiming they were raped after they perform is bs...if he was truly raped against his will..he could not perform....Oh no no no, leave me alone, I dont want too HELP...oh my BOINK ooops...yarite...I dont buy it...me thinks its false protest after the fact myself.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out how to make a flacid penis hard. Sexual desire isn't necessary at all.

 

[roguenuke]

Yes - society encourages the stigmas and the stereotypes to the point where it's funny if a guy's in the situation but twisted if a woman is?

Unfortunately, society does. I'm not saying it is right. I find it very wrong. It just is.

 

[lpast]

It doesn't take a genius to figure out how to make a flacid penis hard. Sexual desire isn't necessary at all.

I disagree with that.

 

[roguenuke]

Rogue, with all due respect to you..I think men claiming they were raped after they perform is bs...if he was truly raped against his will..he could not perform....Oh no no no, leave me alone, I dont want too HELP...oh my BOINK ooops...yarite...I dont buy it...me thinks its false protest after the fact myself.

You're wrong. If men could always control themselves, when they were aroused or when they "finished", then we wouldn't have people with problems of being aroused during less-than-ideal times and premature ejaculations. I realize that these are normally things that happen to younger men, they also happen to older ones, generally more in control if given enough stimulation.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I disagree with that.

All it takes is suction. Mouth, pump, etc. Ejaculation isn't necessary for sex to be forced and rape to have taken place.

Regardless - kidnapping someone and saying 'sex or no freedom' is sexual pursuit by coercion . . . aka . . . rape. Whether the rapist holds a gun to someone's head or threats with false imprisonment doesn't change that.

You seem to be only thinking of rape in regard to physical force - that's not the only way in which it's achieved.

 

[lpast]

You're wrong. If men could always control themselves, when they were aroused or when they "finished", then we wouldn't have people with problems of being aroused during less-than-ideal times and premature ejaculations. I realize that these are normally things that happen to younger men, they also happen to older ones, generally more in control if given enough stimulation.

Look..Im a man and ive been one a long time...you nor aunt spiker or any other person can convince me that if a man is being raped truly against his will and in the same mindset as a woman being forcibly raped..and can get an erection, I say nonesense. Lets get real here ok.
Rape is a violent act...some women do not fight out of pure fear, others fight and are subdued by force by a stronger male or subdued by threat of death with a weapon involved.. Under those same circumstances men would not perform....a man truly being forcibly raped nope nada not...im not buying it.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Look..Im a man and ive been one a long time...you nor aunt spiker or any other person can convince me that if a man is being raped truly against his will and in the same mindset as a woman being forcibly raped..and can get an erection, I say nonesense. Lets get real here ok.
Rape is a violent act...some women do not fight out of pure fear, others fight and are subdued by force by a stronger male or subdued by threat of death with a weapon involved.. Under those same circumstances men would not perform....a man truly being forcibly raped nope nada not...im not buying it.

So - quadriplegics can't have sex? :shrug: Seriously - you're putting too much thought into it.

Honestly - I think it's even rape if someone uses any part of your body to pleasure their self in any way if you don't' want them to.

Your concept - just isn't working for me here.

 

[lpast]

All it takes is suction. Mouth, pump, etc. Ejaculation isn't necessary for sex to be forced and rape to have taken place.

Regardless - kidnapping someone and saying 'sex or no freedom' is sexual pursuit by coercion . . . aka . . . rape. Whether the rapist holds a gun to someone's head or threats with false imprisonment doesn't change that.

You seem to be only thinking of rape in regard to physical force - that's not the only way in which it's achieved.

No not necessarily physical force....Rape in itself is violent..violence in its purest form...stripping someone of their dignity...taking any sense of safety from them taking their being...put a man in that very same real position and mental state and all the suction in the world aint doing squat...the truth is men that perform arent truly raped....

 

[roguenuke]

Look..Im a man and ive been one a long time...you nor aunt spiker or any other person can convince me that if a man is being raped truly against his will and in the same mindset as a woman being forcibly raped..and can get an erection, I say nonesense. Lets get real here ok.
Rape is a violent act...some women do not fight out of pure fear, others fight and are subdued by force by a stronger male or subdued by threat of death with a weapon involved.. Under those same circumstances men would not perform....a man truly being forcibly raped nope nada not...im not buying it.

My brother's a man too. Right here with me. He says that men could absolutely be aroused enough against their will to get off even, but it still be rape.

Not all women fight. All they have to show is that they feared the other person in some way, but it doesn't necessarily have to be force.

But if you stimulate a guy enough, he will get aroused, even while fearful. In fact, some guys could even be aroused by the fear but still not want to have sex.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

No not necessarily physical force....Rape in itself is violent..violence in its purest form...stripping someone of their dignity...taking any sense of safety from them taking their being...put a man in that very same real position and mental state and all the suction in the world aint doing squat...the truth is men that perform arent truly raped....

That's just ridiculous - if a woman's biological function gets her a little lubricated does that mean she wasn't raped? Maybe she was coerced into agreeing. That doesn't negate it.

And who says a man has to perform in order to be raped?

Maybe she's tying him down and using his hands - who knows? It's not all penises and vaginas.

 

[Sarcogito]

Look..Im a man and ive been one a long time...you nor aunt spiker or any other person can convince me that if a man is being raped truly against his will and in the same mindset as a woman being forcibly raped..and can get an erection, I say nonesense. Lets get real here ok.
Rape is a violent act...some women do not fight out of pure fear, others fight and are subdued by force by a stronger male or subdued by threat of death with a weapon involved.. Under those same circumstances men would not perform....a man truly being forcibly raped nope nada not...im not buying it.

It is definitely more difficult than male on female rape. It is possible to get erect when you don’t want to. It is certainly more of a problem when you are younger. Hell, a bumpy bus ride to school is probably enough for a teenager.

But let’s say your body parts work the way they are supposed to, and you do get physically aroused. That still doesn’t mean you want to have sex, just that you are aroused. I have been hit on by women that I found highly physically attractive but I turned them down because I am in a loving marriage. Just because your reproductive organs respond the way they evolved to, does not mean you consent.

 

[Sarcogito]

and once again it all comes down to some people think that women should get to make all the choices (or make a choice and then change the choice at a whim) and the man should just have to deal with it.


I'm not "turning" anything into a crime. all I'm saying is that at some point in time after consent to sex is given, there should be a "point of no return". sorry that some people think it is a crime to expect reasonable behavior from an adult

If I invite you into my house as a guest it remains my right to rescind that invitation at any time. And that is just my house. Nothing is more sacrosanct than one’s autonomy over their own person. At no point during a sexual encounter do you relinquish that autonomy. A person’s body does not become your property to do with as you wish just because you are about to come.

 

[joko104]

Personally I'm not keen on entering a Victorian precept of marital relations.

But I think many on this forum want exactly that - even more so than the Victorian precept of marital relations.

That the bondage crowd... If a husband says to his wife he wants he to tie him down and have sex with him - and more matter how much he pleads to be released he wants her to continue until he climaxes - and she agrees - at that moment it appears that you and many others on this thread claim both of them have committed felony conspiracy to commit sexual assault.

And while I am very much not into bondage either way, I think that it TOTALLY nuts and EXTREME control freakism of imposing your values on others MORE extreme than Victorian precepts. Truly bizarre and social correctness run totally amuck.

Sexual puritans demanding their values be criminally imposed on others will always be with us. There is something in human DNA that seems to compel some people declare it should be criminal for anyone to be different from him/herself.

I've often posted that I believe violent rapists should be executed. Consent never equals rape.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

But I think many on this forum want exactly that - even more so than the Victorian precept of marital relations.

That the bondage crowd... If a husband says to his wife he wants he to tie him down and have sex with him - and more matter how much he pleads to be released he wants her to continue until he climaxes - and she agrees - at that moment it appears that you and many others on this thread claim both of them have committed felony conspiracy to commit sexual assault.

And while I am very much not into bondage either way, I think that it TOTALLY nuts and EXTREME control freakism of imposing your values on others MORE extreme than Victorian precepts. Truly bizarre and social correctness run totally amuck.

Sexual puritans demanding their values be criminally imposed on others will always be with us. There is something in human DNA that seems to compel some people declare it should be criminal for anyone to be different from him/herself.

I've often posted that I believe violent rapists should be executed. Consent never equals rape.

He was referring to the old notion that a woman has no rights when married - that covers things like owning property, etc, and in regard to sex: her opinion didn't matter.

 

[joko104]

He was referring to the old notion that a woman has no rights when married - that covers things like owning property, etc, and in regard to sex: her opinion didn't matter.

That's why I reversed the gender in my comment.

Of course, we are all talking about this from different senarios and circumstances. But I am also stating my view that there are also different personalities and relationships - and different views of what sex is (beyond the biological definition) to people. In most context, no does mean just that. That is why I repeatedly stress prior, clear consent, not real injury and no substantive pain etc. I do believe a person clear headedly may consent to no withdrawing consent within set parameters understood by both. I never believe consent to violence in real terms can be irretractably given. But violence may be consented to - up to no permanent or serious injury, disfigurement or scarring etc.

Consentual forced sex, aggressive sex, combative sex are common fetishes (if that the correct term.) For some people in some circumstances, the goal of both is to go beyond "no" - even a real "no" or real "stop" for a variety of reasons. But, as I often have stressed, that needs to be clearly, precisely understood and consented to - where that consent is voluntary rather than abusive psychological domination.

 

[lpast]

That's just ridiculous - if a woman's biological function gets her a little lubricated does that mean she wasn't raped? Maybe she was coerced into agreeing. That doesn't negate it.

And who says a man has to perform in order to be raped?

Maybe she's tying him down and using his hands - who knows? It's not all penises and vaginas.

When your forcing someone to have sexual relations against their will....you either forcibly take it from them via over powering them or by threat of bodily injury or death while holding a weapon to them....
Lets get this right auntie...ive seen many raped men in my career and every single one of them were raped by another man...see a man does not have to perform to be RAPED by another man...just like a woman in fear of her life or totally over powered does not have to willfully perform.
In my career I was never aware or around a male that had been raped by a female...at least that I can remember..Im not saying it doesnt happen...but its a rare case that a woman can overpower a man. Having said that I find it insulting that anyone can say any man can get excited enough to perform over any woman...even one thats forcibly raping him.....I couldnt even get excited over rosie odonnel offering me a huge sum of cash....

 

[joko104]

I've been in modern civilized society a bit over 5 years. It is notable to me how the politically and socially correct "left" misuses words for the powerful psychology of words - that trivialization causing distortion of priorities and the role of government too.

Examples? The word "war." War is the most unthinkably horrific human events. Nothing matches it. But to use that word is the "war on poverty." "War on drugs." "War on illiteracy." "War on racism." Etc. It is a WRONG use of the word "war." As a result of that trivialization of the word, this country has been in 2 wars for over a decades, who knows how many tens or hundreds of thousands of people died, crippled and unthinkable property destruction and terror - with this not even a thought in most American's mind.

"Poverty" Being impoverished, homeless, freezing and starving is the most desperate of life. But now, for political goals, being "in poverty" also can mean having a nice furnished 2 bedroom apartment or home, all utilities, full refrigerator, car in the driveway, cable TV, an X-Box, closet full of clothes and pocket money. As a result, true poverty is trivialized.

"Racism" has come to mean little for overuse trivialization of true racism, true bigotry etc.

I am objecting to the trivialization of the word "rape." Rape is a horrific crime and what I describe as one of the worst 3. Rape. Violent abuse of a child. Sadistic torture. But on this thread, for social correctness, the word is trivialized terribly.

A minute before climaxing in oral sex, a man wouldn't want the woman to stop even if there was an earthquack. One minute after, he wants her to stop. But if she teasing continues to his increasingly squirming now she is A RAPIST! because she didnt' stop the instant he said. Or if a wife says "I've had enough, stop" and he says "sure, only a 1 or 2 and I'm there too!" - and now that husband is A RAPIST!

The TACTIC that anything that might be upsetting, annoying, cause a person to be miffed, or is abusive MUST ben criminalized and villified using the most villifying words that can be found. As a result, people yawn at the numbers of REAL RAPE.

In the two examples of my OP, the victim was in an ongoing sexual relation with the other. The "victim" (according to some) had been pushing, pushing, pushing the "rapist" - for who knows what reason. Maybe hoping for exactly what happened. Maybe not knowing why. While the two victims might well have been "miffed," "violated," "misused," and had good reason to be very upset or even end the relationship if he/she wished, I do not see it as criminal rape.

For the first one, if I found the husband guilty of rape as the letter of the law, I also have the find the wife guilty of 50 counts of prostitution. So they both go to prison for years? Or are they to be given probation and put on the sex offender's list?

Of the second one, the "victim" had been pushing, pushing, pushing the the other to break down a hard defensive wall and to break the worship status manner in which she previously treated the "victim." The Alpha female psychologically broke, took out her buried away rage in a non-injurious but maybe abusive way against her mate, and then lavished her with appreciation and maybe apologetic ways.

That was within the complex dynamics of their relationships. But because it was less-that-perfectly wanted sex, some declare it among the foulest of all crimes, RAPE!

Neither "victims" were harmed. The "attacker" was taking risks. Was reacting to ongoing pressure and abuse by his/her spouse/partner. Neither victims left. Maybe they were initially upset, miffed, angry, and even violated. But I do not think they rise to criminal rape. If either wanted to, they could have left the relationship and just chalk it up to a good relationship that went bad and ended badly. Using our criminal justice system, prison system and labeling them RAPISTS no different that someone who raped a child or violently raped someone is an unacceptable trivialization of what "RAPE" really means.

^ That's my opinion of it anyway. The games people play with words to attack what is contrary to their own values is a very harmful trivialization causing more harm than good.

 

[Deuce]

Well, if that's what you think. I don't really know the husband and wife well at all. The two women I do and what happened was well within the parameters of their relationship.

"Let me describe for you some situations in which rape is totally ok."

 

[Deuce]

I've been in modern civilized society a bit over 5 years. It is notable to me how the politically and socially correct "left" misuses words for the powerful psychology of words - that trivialization causing distortion of priorities and the role of government too.

Examples? The word "war." War is the most unthinkably horrific human events. Nothing matches it. But to use that word is the "war on poverty." "War on drugs." "War on illiteracy." "War on racism." Etc. It is a WRONG use of the word "war." As a result of that trivialization of the word, this country has been in 2 wars for over a decades, who knows how many tens or hundreds of thousands of people died, crippled and unthinkable property destruction and terror - with this not even a thought in most American's mind.

"Poverty" Being impoverished, homeless, freezing and starving is the most desperate of life. But now, for political goals, being "in poverty" also can mean having a nice furnished 2 bedroom apartment or home, all utilities, full refrigerator, car in the driveway, cable TV, an X-Box, closet full of clothes and pocket money. As a result, true poverty is trivialized.

"Racism" has come to mean little for overuse trivialization of true racism, true bigotry etc.

I am objecting to the trivialization of the word "rape." Rape is a horrific crime and what I describe as one of the worst 3. Rape. Violent abuse of a child. Sadistic torture. But on this thread, for social correctness, the word is trivialized terribly.

A minute before climaxing in oral sex, a man wouldn't want the woman to stop even if there was an earthquack. One minute after, he wants her to stop. But if she teasing continues to his increasingly squirming now she is A RAPIST! because she didnt' stop the instant he said. Or if a wife says "I've had enough, stop" and he says "sure, only a 1 or 2 and I'm there too!" - and now that husband is A RAPIST!

The TACTIC that anything that might be upsetting, annoying, cause a person to be miffed, or is abusive MUST ben criminalized and villified using the most villifying words that can be found. As a result, people yawn at the numbers of REAL RAPE.

In the two examples of my OP, the victim was in an ongoing sexual relation with the other. The "victim" (according to some) had been pushing, pushing, pushing the "rapist" - for who knows what reason. Maybe hoping for exactly what happened. Maybe not knowing why. While the two victims might well have been "miffed," "violated," "misused," and had good reason to be very upset or even end the relationship if he/she wished, I do not see it as criminal rape.

For the first one, if I found the husband guilty of rape as the letter of the law, I also have the find the wife guilty of 50 counts of prostitution. So they both go to prison for years? Or are they to be given probation and put on the sex offender's list?

Of the second one, the "victim" had been pushing, pushing, pushing the the other to break down a hard defensive wall and to break the worship status manner in which she previously treated the "victim." The Alpha female psychologically broke, took out her buried away rage in a non-injurious but maybe abusive way against her mate, and then lavished her with appreciation and maybe apologetic ways.

That was within the complex dynamics of their relationships. But because it was less-that-perfectly wanted sex, some declare it among the foulest of all crimes, RAPE!

Neither "victims" were harmed. The "attacker" was taking risks. Was reacting to ongoing pressure and abuse by his/her spouse/partner. Neither victims left. Maybe they were initially upset, miffed, angry, and even violated. But I do not think they rise to criminal rape. If either wanted to, they could have left the relationship and just chalk it up to a good relationship that went bad and ended badly. Using our criminal justice system, prison system and labeling them RAPISTS no different that someone who raped a child or violently raped someone is an unacceptable trivialization of what "RAPE" really means.

^ That's my opinion of it anyway. The games people play with words to attack what is contrary to their own values is a very harmful trivialization causing more harm than good.

If someone tells you to stop, and you don't, it's ****ing rape. What the flying **** is wrong with you? Stop trying to ****ing rationalize it.

 

[joko104]

If someone tells you to stop, and you don't, it's ****ing rape. What the flying **** is wrong with you? Stop trying to ****ing rationalize it.

No, interpersonal relationships and sexuality are not as simplistic for everyone as apparently is for you. Or maybe you just have a lot of hangups about or fantasy views about sex that are strictly Disney PG13. That sex is about being "nice."

A lot of people sometimes want more than really nice sex. And for a lot of people a good relationship overall isn't just about being nice. Nice can be nice. It also can be boring. More times than not my wife and I have nice sex. That's nice too. Sweet. Or just summary quick draw. "Snuggly." Lazy go to sleep sex. Lovingly. Silly. Calm. Playful sex. And all that is really, really nice. I think most guys would really like nice sex with my wife. She's great at it. As nice of nice sex as any could hope for. I enjoy nice sex with her. I think she really does too.

But its not orgamic for her. Its just nice. Doesn't do a whole lot for me either, but it is, well, nice.

You really wouldn't like "real" sex with my wife. Actually, I think it would be impossible for you, really impossible. That's one of many reasons, a big reason, she had never had a relationship with anyone nor ever pursued one nor allowed any man to do so, though certainly could because she's cute as all get out. Men just seemed too chumpsy, immature, weak, foolish, naive and overall incapable - and those very few possibly not then too untrustable. Although petite and small, she is a person of extreme natural and developed physical prowlness since her earliest childhood.

A man who, with her consent to try, who couldn't "take" her forcible against any resistance she put up - short of weapons - and not hurt her doing so - just isn't good enough. It's her thing. Really surprised me on our honeymoon night too. VERY pleasantly surprised - as in SHE IS F-A-N-T-A-S-T-I-C! as I picked myself off the floor. Round one definitely hers, but I didn't see it coming. But I was in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of fights since about age 4, I can do this! And not hurt her in any way too. She has no such restriction. Its not easy, but its G R E A T. The battle of the sexes. The real thing. No pretending. Isn't play acting. WOW, did I marry well. More than I suspected. And she had guessed me correctly.

And in real sex, something not new to me though none so good as her or coming close, I have never known any woman more orgasmic, sexually charged and dynamic, determined than her. Its quite crazy. Primitive. Combative. Even who has more endurance. Who collapses from exhaustion first. Since she was an international and national competitor for over a decade (14 years to be exact) and still workouts out about 2 hours a day (used to be 5 hours) - intensely - she's good, real good. But then so am I. Arguable as to who gets the best of it.

I'm certain you disapprove, certain we both should go to jail for our crimes against each other.

Sometimes sex is how people work things out between them, particularly in long term relationships. Nothing more makes all troubles vanish than being blindly orgasmic. Its an animalistic thing, not a thing of social platitudes of correctness. I am very aware of what sexual assault/rape is. That ain't it.

You're messages sound naive and boring to me. But maybe that's just me.

 

[the_recruit]

To the OP,

 

[joko104]

To the OP,

Damn, you tagged me! :2razz:

 

[CS5150]

I'd be leery of you if you were my sister's husband. What's so hard to understand about a man raping his wife when they're together? Maybe she doesn't feel like it, he comes home drunk and rapes her despite her not wanting sex. Just cause people are together, doesn't make it okay to force your wife have sex against her will.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

No, interpersonal relationships and sexuality are not as simplistic for everyone as apparently is for you. Or maybe you just have a lot of hangups about or fantasy views about sex that are strictly Disney PG13. That sex is about being "nice."

...

You're missing the point.

You and your wife have worked that arrangement out. That's why some people in BDSM relationships have safe words, because "no" isn't supposed to mean "no." It's just part of the scene.

But there should always be a way to tell you to stop for real, even if it's "chinchilla." And if you don't, yes, that's rape, and it IS that simple.

People can work out whatever arrangements they like, but there should always be a real way to say "Stop. I mean it." Because you never know when something might just go wrong.