Rape or not?

[Mule]

Actually, it's not. She allowed initial penetration to some extent, but forced herself ( through moral dilemma ) to fight off her own wants and needs. The difference lies in the fact that in your story chica was out and about, then came home and did not want sex. This girl did wish to have sex but restrained herself. She wasn't coerced; she willingly probably would have gone through with it as in the story we hear her admit that all she needs is a "push over the egde".

I still respectfully disagree with you. The issue is not what she wanted, but what she said. Verbal retraction of consent trumps anything implied through body language or lustful noises, etc. No-one but her, inside her own mind, knew what she wanted. However, she said no, and that makes any further sex non-consensual, which is rape.

 

[Symphonic]

I still respectfully disagree with you. The issue is not what she wanted, but what she said. Verbal retraction of consent trumps anything implied through body language or lustful noises, etc. No-one but her, inside her own mind, knew what she wanted. However, she said no, and that makes any further sex non-consensual, which is rape.

She "said" a lot actually, not just a straight out calm no. From a legal perspective it would definitely be not in her favor, if told as this man proclaims, because she openly states that she would like / enjoy sexual intercourse with him.

This is the difference between your example, and my example; in your example she just vocalizes "no" with no other commentary and there isn't a moral dilemma present. In my example the person vocalizes their want and willingness but regressed due to some hang-up and, at one point, vocalizes the probable outcome of continuing forth ( enjoyment ) as well as using the power suggestion to advocate for themselves.

I'd agree if she said "No, I mustn't, I would not want to, and that is all there is to it." However, she said "No, I mustn't, ( religion here ), but I want to, and I'd really love to do it, but I mustn't, but I want to."

In short in #1 it is a firm "no", and in #2 it is a reluctance based not on personal want or need ( in short, she's consenting or would otherwise have given consent ) in regards to herself.

 

[Mule]

This is the difference...

I completely understand where you're coming from on this. However, I think that the lawyer for the prosecution in a hypothetical rape case brought against the OP would try to eliminate (perhaps successfully) the grey area by saying that verbal consent was not given, and any implied consent was negated by the verbal assertion of "no".

But I think the more important question is not the legal one, but the moral one. The OP was not sure that his partner was giving consent, therefore did the right thing by backing off. It is always better to err on the side of caution. He could always have fucked her if/when she clearly and unequivocally asked for it later.

 

[Hippie Hollow Girl]

OP you did the right thing. No means no. Whatever sexual act needs to be consentual. If you had pushed it in she could have used you as a scapegoat for her guilt over what she has been brainwashed not to do until marriage. And she could have been batshit crazy and went and told her family or the law......and it would have been a He Said, She Said situation.....and who's version do you think everyone is going to believe? Especially her family.

Also there are people that actually are OK with their daughter's doing everything but the deed. It should be the girl's decision who she gives her virginity too. I truly believed that the girl was struggling with the decision whether to let you put your cock into her because she had it in her mind that this was a very serious thing (kind of like marriage) and she identified with being a virgin.....and she wasn't sure she could give up that association.... Or she wasn't sure if you were the right one.


I would have thought that she would have at least given you a hand job or helped you out since you had pleasured her so many times.

And you actually spent more nights with her after that first night? At least you knew that sexual intercourse means something to her. And at least you didn't have to worry about unexpected pregnancy.

I am sure by now she probably regrets not letting you have her virginity.....and she probably plays it back over and over in her mind. But at least she probably thinks a lot more of you because you respected her moral decision not to have sexual intercourse......even though her body was betraying her.

 

[AustinSwallower]

Women just seem to be so high maintenance, moody etc...I myself prefer to service a horny stud. Lick and smell his balls. Feel him spurt in my mouth and swallow his throat yogurt or feel it twitch and spurt in my hole !! Just a sub that wants to please. The women should take the cock and appreciate that the guy is allowing her to have some ! And DON'T waste his seed !

 

[D_Coyne Toss]

You did well: the notion of rape is getting wider and wider.

Moreover it would have been your word against hers, so it could have been real trouble: convincing a court that with "No" sue didn't mean "No" but "I can't say yes" would be difficult.

On my opinion, all that comes after a "No" might be rape: maybe unfair but insicts should be controlled.

 

[bigjpgh]

there is a big difference between saying no and not saying yes. she said she wanted it but couldn't say yes? fine, then don't say anything! if that same situation had happened and she had said nothing at all, you two would have fucked. but she didn't, she said no, which is a far cry from just not saying yes.

 

[SyddyKitty]

No means no unless stated otherwise (like in the case of a roleplay).

You did the right thing, not forcing it. People are crazy out there, she could have easily said you raped her if you had continued... and had it believable enough to get you convicted (I won't go into my reasons for believing that but it's pretty obvious).

 

[B_New End]

No means no.

And if I were a juror, I would have convicted you. Any sexual act someone doesn't want to do, and you force it upon them, would be considered rape.

Sucks you didn't even get off for all that.

 

[arrivaderciroma]

You can test the "no" by asking for reciprocal oral after you've contributed your share.
If the answer is "no" you have to cut your losses. If you try to penetrate her vagina and the response is "no", you've been forwarned and you have to quit or fall-back to oral or hands. If you can't get oral or release thru a hj; and you're both naked, maybe she'll watch you jerk off and make oohs and ahs. Would that make you happy?

You can't always get what you want. Stay loose.

 

[nicenycdick]

I've practiced law for many years and this is one I would have gotten wrong. My first inclination would have been to say that once consent to penetration is given, even if for a moment (as in this case), rape is no longer an issue. But, as some caselaw has recently shown, I would have been wrong:

"The crime of first-degree rape includes post-penetration vaginal intercourse accomplished through force or threat of force and without the consent of the victim, even if the victim consented to the initial penetration," the Court of Appeals wrote. Md. Court Rules Women Can Withdraw Sexual Consent - washingtonpost.com

This clearly reflects a newer standard society holds for relations of all kinds between men and women. While it is morally balanced, it makes me wonder how the Courts will handle issues such as the length of time between the "no" and withdrawal. It should at least make for some interesting testimony...and future decisions.

 

[D_Coyne Toss]

I made a research in Italian criminal law: it would have been considered rape here too.

According to our High Court the consent to a sexual act can be withdrawed at anytime. Once it is demonstrated that the other part has realized the "no", the crime of rape is integrated.

In this case she syad no once, and you stopped. Than you tried once again, and she said no again. No doubt you understood her no, so yes, it would have been rape.

Anyway and most important: regardless to what the law says, insisting after a no IS morally a rape.

 

[RandyL]

Fuckin' women and their equal rights bullshit. They need to remember that their place is to bend over, take the cock, and enjoy it. And do what their man wants them to do. Even if the woman brings home a bigger paycheck.

 

[D_Coyne Toss]

Fuckin' women and their equal rights bullshit. They need to remember that their place is to bend over, take the cock, and enjoy it. And do what their man wants them to do. Even if the woman brings home a bigger paycheck.

You are joking, aren't you?

 

[Jason]

An interesting scenario.

As I understand English law, consent can be withdrawn at any time, so the scenario you set out would be considered rape. This seems to be in agreement with the US and Italian examples above. A problem that can be forseen is that the man picks up his pace as climax approaches and at this time the woman decides she has had enough and says no. The man at this time in sex is acting in a way that is akin to a reflex action, and additionally he is not likely at this time to make a good asessment of the legal implications of continuing - yet as I understand it this would be considered rape in England.

It seems to me that the girl in this scenario was very foolish, as there was a significant probability of her actions leading to penetrative sex. She was also pretty much manipulative of the guy. Getting naked with a guy and taking part in foreplay leads to a reasonable expectation of sex. Her motives - apparently wanting to be forced so that she could claim not to be responsible - are tied up with a lot of religious and parental baggage - very messy. I suppose a defence for the man could be that once this was explained to him she had in fact set out that in this case no actually meant yes, but I wouldn't care to argue it. For the man the answer is to get out of such a relationship at once.

The poll result is that about a quarter of men feel that this would not constitute rape. LPSG attracts computer-literate guys, ie a sample skewed to the more educated. I suspect that a higher percentage of all men would not see this as rape. And if your sample is horned up 21 year olds engaged in heavy sexual play with an orgasming 18 year old the figure changes again.

 

[craig_uk]

No means no.

And if I were a juror, I would have convicted you. Any sexual act someone doesn't want to do, and you force it upon them, would be considered rape.

Sucks you didn't even get off for all that.

Any non-consensual sexual act is called sexual assualt. Rape is a very specific act of penetrating the vagina or anus with a penis without consent.

Not all sexual assualt is rape.

 

[Jason]

Another thought on this.

Lets say the guy went ahead anyway, and this ended up as a formal complaint of rape. This of course would be horrible for everyone involved.

Yet the background is the girl consenting to being naked in bed and engaging in sex play with a guy. If his testimony is that she said no and he went ahead anyway then he's probably convicted himself - prison, criminal record, life wrecking experience. But if he lies and says she didn't say no, there is no way this would even get to a court, let alone to a conviction. He might even be able to rationalise this to himself that her no was play-acting, or was a request for him to change his technique rather than to stop. The poll results show that a substantial minority of guys do not regard this as rape. My thought is that most guys would lie. Perhaps we have got a problem where the punishment is disproportional.

 

[OldFirm08]

She is the definition of a 'prick teaser', that's for sure. She's lucky she hasn't been severely raped by someone if this is the sex game she plays on guys. Best stay away for good from this one.

 

[ssongs]

As long as you stopped when she said no, it's not rape.

 

[javyn]

To the OP...

Yes I'd have considered it rape too if you wouldn't have stopped. Sure you could have beaten it in court, but by the time you'd have gotten to trial to defend yourself you life would surely already be ruined. Avoid women like this like plague. I'd never speak with her again. I know LOTS of men who have had their lives ruined by women and the situations are always incredibly similar to yours.

If you decide to break it off completely with her, do it easy though. Many women love to falsely accuse men of rape when they reject them. I've seen it time and time again, and actually have a friend dealing with that right now. Her boyfriend she's shaked up with couldn't afford to buy her the car she wanted, so when he suggested she get a job herself, she blew up and is currently going around telling everyone we know he raped her and beat her ass. The same night she's beating on my door trying to have a 3some with my gf and I. You have really got to watch yourself being a man in this day in age.