I’ve often wondered how powerful it would be to teach girls and women in those cases to say, “No, I do not want this, this is rape.” Or at least if there is any ambiguousness on her part, “I don’t know. I need to think about this.” In order to do that, though, we would have to create a culture where it is safe to do so. It wouldn’t stop all rapes but it would reduce the odds of, “She let me do it so it’s not rape.”
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
So if I reach out and grab the pussy of an attractive woman I find next to me on the elevator, it’s all ok, so long as I stop as soon as she slaps me? After all I was just establishing what her limits were.
I agree with that.
[Although I don’t know if your experience is directly comparable. IIRC you were a child dealing with a stepfather.]
One thing that makes it (i.e. non-verbal cues) somewhat more complicated is that some women use subtle signals of sexual availability to attract men even when that’s not their actual intention. Which is not to say these women are consciously misleading anyone. They’re doing what works and what’s a socially/culturally accepted role for them in it, without necessarily being fully cognizant that a large part of why these things work is because of the (possibly incorrect) signals they convey.
This might make it more complicated in terms of determining whether someone wants to go on a date, but how does it matter in terms of consent to sexual activity?
People generally interpret non-verbal cues (even verbal ones, actually but especially non-verbal ones) in the context of their assessment of the overall situation and the cuer’s current mindset.
Okay, but just because a woman sends out sexual cues doesn’t mean she wants to have sex. Just because she wants to make out doesn’t mean she wants to have sex. Just because she wants to have vaginal sex doesn’t mean she wants anal sex. That all has to be part of the conversation. You can’t just assume someone who is down for something is down for *anything. *
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Of course.
What specific point are you making with this?
[My bolding]
This is the key. Nobody, nobody asks “is this okay?” **every **time they kiss, hug, lick, grab while with a willing partner.
Many, many people ask “is this okay?” every time they escalate sexual behavior.
I think the first option is a bit too harsh as an opening gambit. I think there are many women who may want to maintain a positive relationship or even romantic relationship with the guy in question, but just don’t want to go as far as he’s going. Bringing up the accusation of possible rape would throw a giant pot of cold water on any relationship. Still, it’s infinitely better than a rape actually occurring and so is useful as a last resort.
Your second option sounds much better. it slows things down and stops the action, but leaves room for continuing the relationship after defining the boundaries.
Actually, I know a number of women who are survivors of sexual abuse whose husbands/lovers do have do this. Strangely, enough none of them seem to think it’s an undue burden to be conscious of the fact that their wives still have psychological scars from surviving intense trauma.
The second option is better in terms of potentially continuing to develop a relationship, BUT it (currently) allows the guy to press his advantage so to speak. Too many men see it as an opportunity to persuade. She didn’t say no, she said “I don’t know, i need to think.” She can be talked into it!
And yes, I am speaking from experience as a woman. I have been in situations where the guy apparently thought "She didn’t hit me, or scream rape, so I still have a chance. I can totally convince her. "
Well my first option was really intended as a last resort when “no” or active resistance was ignored. It should throw a pot of cold water on the relationship, yes. It was already sexual assault before that point. This is an attempt to explicitly communicate that the assailant is committing a crime. It signals to the assailant, “You are legally at risk here.” The most likely response would be defensiveness, anger, and maybe disgust, but it might stop the assault and allow the victim to leave.
FP it sounded to me like you were saying rape happens sometimes because women give out unintentional sexual signals. I was thinking you meant something like a smouldering stare across a crowded bar or something. Perhaps I misunderstood.
I dunno if it was this thread but Annie X-mas talked about how she once loudly announced to a stranger on a crowded subway, “Get your hand off my ass!” I think that’s a good example of the kind of explicitness I mean. Many women would have questioned the guy’s motives or remained silent in fear… We have to end that part of our culture. We have to learn to be like Annie.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
What are you talking about? In 20+ years of dating and marriage I have never asked if I can kiss someone, and I’ve never heard of anyone asking. How many knees to the groin have you administered?
I just watched a segment of the Daily Show where a guy said- to a reporter, on camera - “One guy’s sexual assault is another guy’s flirtation.” Tell me, someone, anyone, that was surely staged, and some “regular” guy didn’t decide that not only does that make sense, but is so proud of it that he was cool with airing it on TV.
To an extent, my husband does this on a regular basis. Not every second or every time but he does check in with me frequently because I’ll zone right out. In many cases, I am on the fence. My mental narrative is usually something like, ‘‘Hey, can I not think about the abuse right now? That’d be great.’’
He knew full well what he was signing up for going in and he has never complained, not once, not even made me feel a little bit guilty, not once in fourteen years. A lot of survivors are not that lucky. We already feel guilty, some partners, sadly, add to that guilt out of their own sexual frustration. I won’t pretend it doesn’t suck for the partner to have your woman be sudden and irrevocably Not in the Mood, but as he’s repeatedly drilled into my head, that’s not on me, it’s on the people who abused me.
You’re right, that is not explicit enough. Maybe something like, ‘‘Don’t touch me there right now.’’ Leaves the door open for future contact while establishing firm boundaries in the present. The idea is to make women more assertive in recognizing and communicating when their boundaries are being violated. Generally, I’m advocating for enhanced communication from both parties in the interest of both feeling in control of the situation. I believe we can raise the bar while still keeping expectations reasonable and in line with human social behavior. This is especially critical for people who are having sexual contact for the first time. You have to assume with a stranger or someone new to you, you’ll be less adept at reading those signals.
Quite revealing how he’s defining assault from the POV of the perpetrator, not the victim.
Asshole.
‘Spotting when no means yes’, which is what Limbaugh said, is not interpreting non-verbal clues. It’s being given an explicit verbal direction and then deciding to ignore it.
Quite a number, it seems to be the only way some men respect a “no.”