# Canuck Supreme Court/Do not fondle your sleeping wife's boobs **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 27, 2011, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446 "2011-05-27T17:01:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/1 "2011-05-27T17:01:13Z")
[If she can’t actively consent to any specific sexual activity because she’s not conscious, then you have committed sexual assault.](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/no-consent-in-unconscious-sex-case-supreme-court-rules/article2037117/) Apparently this guy choked his SO into unconciousness, which was okay, but then he inserted a dildo up her relaxed ass without permission. Two months later she cries rape for the dildo. What ever happened to “The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.” ? This is the most retarded Supreme Court decision ever handed down. As far as I’m concerned, if a person in an ongoing sexual relationship, particularly marriage finds they have been violated sexually, they can deal with the problem within their relationship and terminate if neccessary. I’d make an exception for physical harm and/or previously specified taboos. But the idea that a spouse must keep his hands off the other spouse while he/she is asleep unless he/she trusts the other enough not to go to the authorities is just too much to ignore for me. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/2 "2011-05-27T17:03:49Z")
If you fondle someone’s sleeping boobs and she doesn’t wake up, you’re not doing it right. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/3 "2011-05-27T17:06:55Z")
If someone fondles themself while asleep, have they committed self-rape? ---
**Author:** ![Paranoid\_Randroid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/paranoid_randroid/32/18_2.png) [@Paranoid\_Randroid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paranoid_Randroid)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/4 "2011-05-27T17:17:29Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > As far as I’m concerned, if a person in an ongoing sexual relationship, particularly marriage finds they have been violated sexually, they can deal with the problem within their relationship and terminate if neccessary. I’d make an exception for physical harm and/or previously specified taboos. I’m having trouble getting a handle on the sort of behavior your rules would prohibit. What is a “previously specified taboo”? Would rape-as-commonly-understood qualify, so long as care were taken not to effect physical damage? Would inserting a dildo into the ass of one’s unconscious wife _not_ be taboo, or at the very least a violation of societal norms? > [@](#): > > But the idea that a spouse must keep his hands off the other spouse while he/she is asleep unless he/she trusts the other enough not to go to the authorities is just too much to ignore for me. But we’re not talking about cuddling or even groping, here, we’re talking about anal penetration. If you don’t believe that your spouse would refrain from accusations of rape due to unconscious anal penetration, then I suggest you probably shouldn’t do that (and I don’t feel I’m being terribly unreasonable here) – why is that “too much to ignore”? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/5 "2011-05-27T17:19:52Z")
At first glance, this sound likes one of those textbook don’t-talk-to-the-cops situations. Detective: Your wife says two months you choked her unconscious and put a dildo in her anus. Is that correct? WHAT DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE SAID: I’m not answering any questions until I talk to my lawyer. WHAT DEFENDANT PROBABLY SAID: Yeah. So? ---
**Author:** ![pikey\_pete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pikey\_pete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pikey_pete)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/6 "2011-05-27T17:34:38Z")
wait, wait, wait…TWO MONTHS later? how the hell is she going to prove that unless he used a dildo the diameter of a 1 liter soda bottle? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/7 "2011-05-27T17:38:34Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > WHAT DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE SAID: I’m not answering any questions until I talk to my lawyer. > > WHAT DEFENDANT PROBABLY SAID: Yeah. So? Reminds me of this: [That is not what R. Kelly _does_](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQm37z1dgmk)! ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/8 "2011-05-27T17:43:06Z")
Maybe I’m just old fashioned, but I think there’s a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife’s breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/9 "2011-05-27T17:47:26Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Maybe I’m just old fashioned, but I think there’s a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife’s breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass. No, the gap is only two feet and around the corner. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/10 "2011-05-27T17:58:51Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Maybe I’m just old fashioned, but I think there’s a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife’s breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass. Well, the guy was an ass. So I can’t dredge up to much sympathy for him. What _is_ concerning is the fact that this decision opens up the gate for any vindictive bitch that wants to cry rape on her SO because she having relationship issues. ---
**Author:** ![Jeff\_Lichtman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeff_lichtman/32/1531_2.png) [@Jeff\_Lichtman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jeff_Lichtman)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/11 "2011-05-27T18:00:24Z")
What if you shake her hand while she’s asleep? ---
**Author:** ![Agent\_Foxtrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc29f/32.png) [@Agent\_Foxtrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agent_Foxtrot)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/12 "2011-05-27T18:00:40Z")
Am I the only one who lacked sufficient reading comprehension for the article? The way I read it, the Canadian court restored a man’s conviction of sexual assault since the woman was unconscious and couldn’t give consent. Then feminist groups were decrying the decision, saying that if someone give consent once, that’s pretty much _de facto_ consent forever. But that’s completely the opposite of what was stated earlier in the article. What am I missing? ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/13 "2011-05-27T18:01:11Z")
Yes, I agree that this has ‘unintended consequences’ written all over it. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/14 "2011-05-27T18:02:07Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Maybe I’m just old fashioned, but I think there’s a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife’s breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass. I’m inclined to agree. Nevertheless, unconsented boob-groping is still sexual assault, or so the duty sergeant assured me during the interview. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/15 "2011-05-27T18:02:51Z")
Sounds like it couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. > [@The OP's linked article](#): > > Among J.A.’s 23 previous criminal convictions are three for domestic violence – including twice against his current partner. In one of these assaults, he kicked in her door, attempted to hit her with a wine bottle and called her a “whore, bitch, skank.” But there is also this: > [@](#): > > “Her evidence that she consented to it – or was okay with it – when she regained consciousness has no bearing,” Ontario Court Judge Dianne Nicholas concluded. “There is no implied consent to sexual activity. It is a criminal activity to engage in sexual activity with a person who is unconscious.” Which seems to suggest that either she didn’t “cry rape,” or attempted to rescind her cry, to no avail. It isn’t completely clear from the article whether she sought out police to tell them about it— is it possible they were talking to her about something unrelated, asked if the guy had ever put his hands on her, and she replied “well, couple of weeks ago he choked me unconscious and shoved a dildo up my ass, but that was no big deal…” ? ---
**Author:** ![Asimovian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asimovian/32/172_2.png) [@Asimovian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asimovian)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/16 "2011-05-27T18:31:23Z")
Having read most of the actual opinion, it sounds like they had a domestic dispute where the guy threatened to try to take full legal custody of her child, and because that pissed her off, she complained to the police about the assault. They both sound like winners to me. What’s frightening is that the court specifically addresses one of the convicted guy’s arguments that if the court were to rule this way, it would basically mean that kissing your wife while she’s asleep could be considered sexual assault if she complains about it. And the court _admits that this is true_ while making the ruling. I’m…flabbergasted. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/17 "2011-05-27T18:52:33Z")
> [@Asimovian](#): > > What’s frightening is that the court specifically addresses one of the convicted guy’s arguments that if the court were to rule this way, it would basically mean that kissing your wife while she’s asleep could be considered sexual assault if she complains about it. And the court _admits that this is true_ while making the ruling. I’m…flabbergasted. It also seems to say that even if she gave consent prior to going asleep, it’s still sexual assault. > [@](#): > > The definition of consent “requires the complainant to provide actual active consent throughout every phase of the sexual activity. It is not possible for an unconscious person to satisfy this requirement, even if she expresses her consent in advance,” Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote for the majority. Thankfully, I live in the USA, where it’s still ok to wake up your wife by grabbing her ass, without worrying about anything but getting slapped. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/18 "2011-05-27T19:01:59Z")
> [@Asimovian](#): > > What’s frightening is that the court specifically addresses one of the convicted guy’s arguments that if the court were to rule this way, it would basically mean that kissing your wife while she’s asleep could be considered sexual assault if she complains about it. And the court _admits that this is true_ while making the ruling. I’m…flabbergasted. I think what the court did there was just to beg Parliament to deal with that possibility rather than leaving it to the courts to carve out a bunch of impossible-to-carve-out exception cases. It’s a pretty impossible thing to ask the court to make sure that it rules in a way that will categorically rule out something extremely mild like an unwanted kiss, especially when the case at bar is one that apparently involved binding the unconscious woman’s hands before penetrating her anus _and_ one that involves a recanted accusation by the alleged victim. I can’t say I blame the court for not wanting to reinterpret the entirety of the criminal code just to make a ruling that couldn’t hypothetically lead to a bad result elsewhere if every person involved was kind of wildly unreasonable about it. I think the court acknowledges a bit of an overbreadth problem, but it wants a legislative solution to it. I’m not sure “Don’t touch your wife’s boobs while she’s asleep” is quite what the court said, in any event. When someone is actually prosecuted for something remotely similar to that, that’s when I’ll start to be worried about it. And I continue to be mildly entertained by how paranoid a lot of the male members of this board seem to be about this stuff – “opens up the gate for any vindictive bitch that wants to cry rape on her SO because she having relationship issues,” really? False accusations of any crime are always possible; I doubt all those women who are out to get you were waiting for favorable jurisprudence before they perjured themselves in the hopes of bringing you low, first of all, and second of all, this doesn’t open the door to any false claims of rape anyway. All you can really take from this ruling is that, if you’re in Canada, you probably shouldn’t tie up anybody’s hands and insert a dildo into his/her anus after you’ve choked him/her unconscious. And really, if that news comes as a big blow to your lifestyle… ---
**Author:** ![furlibusea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aca169/32.png) [@furlibusea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furlibusea)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/19 "2011-05-27T19:02:29Z")
Wait, Wait, Wait… The guy **Choked her into UNCONSCIOUSNESS** and that is somehow OK?.. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2011, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446/20 "2011-05-27T19:03:31Z")
The actual [judgement](http://scc.lexum.org/en/2011/2011scc28/2011scc28.html). The bit about the dangers of kissing your sleeping wife (or hell sleeping child or sibling and parent) are on para 58. I do think Justice has been served in this case. I do not think that the principal created is a sound one. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/canuck-supreme-court-do-not-fondle-your-sleeping-wifes-boobs/583446.md?page=2)