Apparently, Rape is not Rape

[Neo Art]

Meanwhile, may I add, that THIS is why people like me use safe words. Human language, feelings, and emotions are imprecise. "yes, no, oh god, oh my god, don't stop, stop, go, no, yes, oh god stop, oh god don't stop", all can get middled and confused.

But when someone has the presence of mind to, in intense moments of passion, pleasure and pain, yell out "Banana! I SAID BANANA!" you know she means business

I always use "Margaret Thatcher!" as it kills the mood and is a clear signal all at once.

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

[Ifreann]

Why isn't the intercourse over when she passed out? After all, an unconscious person can't participate in sex any more than a fleshlight can.

The body can continue with the physical actions of sex after the conscious mind has stopped.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6540

How very odd. But its a single case of something very unusual happening in a situation that only 0.5% of adults. While this anonymous sleep-shagger's sleeping mind certainly sends her body off in search of sex, that doesn't mean any other woman's unconscious mind could make her body continue to participate in sex.

[The_pantless_hero]

I do have a question for anyone who wants to answer. And don't consider it confrontational or argumentative, but merely an attempt to find a baseline in the conversation.

Let's say you and I are engaged in sex ( ), sex that we each have each other's full, complete, unambiguous and informed consent for. Now, halfway through the "deed" you change your mind. You decide, internally, that you don't want to be doing this anymore. I no longer have your consent for this act.

But you do not tell me, do not resist, do not indicate in any tangible way that you do not want to do this any further. I continue.

At that point, am I raping you?

No. Unless you are a mind-reader.

That was obviously not being targeted at rational people and isn't being answered by the targets.

[Angleter]

Would this mean that once engaged in sex, both (or all) partners are obligated to say "I give you permission to continue fucking me," at regular intervals?

damn it, you beat me to my punchline. But you do make a point. We don't do this, obviously. None of us have ever actually do that. And because I think we accept that consent, once given, is implicitly CONTINUED TO BE GIVEN until explicitly revoked.

I think you're incorrect here. I think we accept that consent, once given, is implicitly continued to be given until explicitly revoked or something significant changes. I do not think you honestly believe that if your girlfriend had a stroke in the middle of you having sex with her, it would be perfectly fine for you to keep on fucking her as if nothing was happening. I'm pretty sure you would feel like, at that point, regardless of whether she could articulate "stop" or struggle against you, you would be obligated to climb off her and get her medical care immediately rather than ignoring her well-being because, hey, she never explicitly told you to stop fucking her.

So you are saying that the law should explicitly cover the scenario of extreme medical catastrophes occurring during intercourse? Or are you being sarcastic- apparently my sarcasmometer is fucked (possibly without consent).

[Ifreann]

Meanwhile, may I add, that THIS is why people like me use safe words. Human language, feelings, and emotions are imprecise. "yes, no, oh god, oh my god, don't stop, stop, go, no, yes, oh god stop, oh god don't stop", all can get middled and confused.

But when someone has the presence of mind to, in intense moments of passion, pleasure and pain, yell out "Banana! I SAID BANANA!" you know she means business

I always use "Margaret Thatcher!" as it kills the mood and is a clear signal all at once.

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

If you'll all excuse me for a moment, I need to introduce about a pint and a half of bleach to my brain.

[Galloism]

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

If you'll all excuse me for a moment, I need to introduce about a pint and a half of bleach to my brain.

Aha! Success!

*takes notes*

[Neo Art]

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

If you'll all excuse me for a moment, I need to introduce about a pint and a half of bleach to my brain.

Aha! Success!

*takes notes*

I'm making a note here "huge success!"

[Angleter]

I always use "Margaret Thatcher!" as it kills the mood and is a clear signal all at once.

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

If you'll all excuse me for a moment, I need to introduce about a pint and a half of bleach to my brain.

Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman having sex on a cold day!

[Sdaeriji]

Why isn't the intercourse over when she passed out? After all, an unconscious person can't participate in sex any more than a fleshlight can.

The body can continue with the physical actions of sex after the conscious mind has stopped.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6540

How very odd. But its a single case of something very unusual happening in a situation that only 0.5% of adults. While this anonymous sleep-shagger's sleeping mind certainly sends her body off in search of sex, that doesn't mean any other woman's unconscious mind could make her body continue to participate in sex.

I'm not suggesting that the girl in this situation shared the sleepfucking condition. But it does highlight the fact that our body can continue to exhibit the signs of sexual stimulation whether our conscious mind is involved or not. While we obviously don't know for sure, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that the girl still seemed like she was consciously engaging in sex, and that combined with the guy's own inhibited mental state may have led him to not realize she was unconscious.

[Ifreann]

Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!

If you'll all excuse me for a moment, I need to introduce about a pint and a half of bleach to my brain.

Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman having sex on a cold day!

......
Three pints.

[Dempublicents1]

Consent is given on a fuck-by-fuck basis.

If that were true, one could not withdraw consent during a fuck.

Yet, you can. So it would actually seem that consent is something that must be continually granted, not something you can just assume because the person gave consent once before.

This is the reason that people who engage in certain sex acts need to set up a safe word ahead of time - as a way for the person who might be screaming "NO, NO!" but not meaning it to be able to say, without ambiguity, "No, I really mean it. Stop." If someone is unconscious, they don't have that ability. Thus, one cannot assume that they are consenting.

[Ifreann]

The body can continue with the physical actions of sex after the conscious mind has stopped.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6540

How very odd. But its a single case of something very unusual happening in a situation that only 0.5% of adults. While this anonymous sleep-shagger's sleeping mind certainly sends her body off in search of sex, that doesn't mean any other woman's unconscious mind could make her body continue to participate in sex.

I'm not suggesting that the girl in this situation shared the sleepfucking condition. But it does highlight the fact that our body can continue to exhibit the signs of sexual stimulation whether our conscious mind is involved or not. While we obviously don't know for sure, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that the girl still seemed like she was consciously engaging in sex, and that combined with the guy's own inhibited mental state may have led him to not realize she was unconscious.

Perhaps he didn't notice as soon as she had passed out, but he did notice, according to his lawyer.

Laura Finnegan, for Sloan, told the court the woman "willingly" went into the parklands with her client. "After a few minutes they started touching each other sexually," she said.

"The victim took her pants down and Sloan (performed a sex act).

"At some point while that was occurring, Sloan has noticed that the victim has appeared to pass out or fallen asleep – she had been consuming alcohol earlier, he believed she was somewhat intoxicated.

"When she appeared to have fallen asleep or passed out, Sloan continued to (perform the sex act)."

[Angleter]

Consent is given on a fuck-by-fuck basis.

If that were true, one could not withdraw consent during a fuck.

Yet, you can. So it would actually seem that consent is something that must be continually granted, not something you can just assume because the person gave consent once before.

This is the reason that people who engage in certain sex acts need to set up a safe word ahead of time - as a way for the person who might be screaming "NO, NO!" but not meaning it to be able to say, without ambiguity, "No, I really mean it. Stop." If someone is unconscious, they don't have that ability. Thus, one cannot assume that they are consenting.

I already fixed that. What I meant was that consent given to a fuck only applies to that fuck and not to another fuck. I also believe that consent for the remainder of that fuck should be assumed unless otherwise stated.

[Dempublicents1]

I do have a question for anyone who wants to answer. And don't consider it confrontational or argumentative, but merely an attempt to find a baseline in the conversation.

Let's say you and I are engaged in sex ( ), sex that we each have each other's full, complete, unambiguous and informed consent for. Now, halfway through the "deed" you change your mind. You decide, internally, that you don't want to be doing this anymore. I no longer have your consent for this act.

But you do not tell me, do not resist, do not indicate in any tangible way that you do not want to do this any further. I continue.

At that point, am I raping you?

I would say no. If I am able to tell you that I no longer consent, and I don't, there's no way for you to know that. Since I haven't told you otherwise, it is reasonable for you to assume that I'm still cool with it.

Of course, if I am incapable of telling you, and you are aware of that fact, then it is no longer reasonable to assume. You need to find out.

[Sdaeriji]

Perhaps he didn't notice as soon as she had passed out, but he did notice, according to his lawyer.

I've been operating as though we've moved to hypothetical instead of the specifics of this particular case. I believe the reasonable among us came to something of an agreement that he wasn't raping her when she was unconscious but he didn't know, but he was raping her once he figured it out but continued anyway.

[Dempublicents1]

Consent is given on a fuck-by-fuck basis.

It absolutely is not. If I am having sex with my boyfriend, and I say, "I don't like this, please stop now, seriously, stop" midway through, and he does not stop, he is then raping me. Consent is given on a CONTINUOUS basis and can therefore be revoked at any time.

Consent is given AND REVOKED on a fuck-by-fuck basis.

Fixed? The point I was making was that you cannot claim that unconsensual sex after consensual sex was consensual due to the consent given to the previous fuck.

Indeed. And when you become incapable of consent, it becomes unconsensual.

Easy. If he had never realized she was unconscious, and continued the sex act that he had prior consent for until completion without ever figuring out, in his drunken stupor, that she wasn't conscious, then according to NA's post (and your agreement with my reply to it) he would not have raped her according to the law.

The key words here being "if he had never realized....."

The thing that made it not rape, in that hypothetical, is that he didn't know she was incapable of withdrawing consent and thus could reasonably assume that her inaction in doing so represented continued consent.

However, after completing this agreed-upon sex act, he began to do something new with her that he hadn't received prior consent, he would need to ask for consent, correct? At which point he would realize that she was unconscious when she didn't reply. If he chose to continue with the new, unconsented sex act regardless of her status, then all assumptions of ignorance are lost, and we can easily say that he raped her.

Assumptions of ignorance were lost when he admitted to knowing that she was unconscious.

If he only performed the act that he had consent for, and he had no reasonable reason to suspect that consent had been withdrawn, either implicitly or explicitly, then that is different from performing an act for which he had NO consent.

As I said, I see consent as an ongoing process, not a one time thing. If she cannot continue to consent to the act (which she can't if she is unable to withdraw consent), then he has every reasons to suspect that she no longer consents.

[Dempublicents1]

Why isn't the intercourse over when she passed out? After all, an unconscious person can't participate in sex any more than a fleshlight can.

Pretty much. At that point, it becomes masturbation with a living sex toy.

I think you're incorrect here. I think we accept that consent, once given, is implicitly continued to be given until explicitly revoked or something significant changes. I do not think you honestly believe that if your girlfriend had a stroke in the middle of you having sex with her, it would be perfectly fine for you to keep on fucking her as if nothing was happening. I'm pretty sure you would feel like, at that point, regardless of whether she could articulate "stop" or struggle against you, you would be obligated to climb off her and get her medical care immediately rather than ignoring her well-being because, hey, she never explicitly told you to stop fucking her.

Precisely. When someone is capable of withdrawing consent, failure to do so and continued participation in the act can certainly be reasonably seen as continued consent. When someone becomes incapable, such failure can no longer be seen as continued consent - because there's no option but to fail to do so.

It's like saying, "If you want me to stop, you have to start flying like Superman," and then claiming that it couldn't possibly be rape, because the other person didn't take off in flight.

[Sdaeriji]

*snip*

In the interests of clarity, I'd appreciate it if you would decide if we're discussing hypotheticals or the details of this one specific case. You made a hypothetical argument; I replied with a hypothetical counter-argument. It's not really fair for you to dismiss my hypothetical response to your hypothetical with "well, that's not what actually happened." I know that's not what actually happened. We're discussing the abstract.

[Dempublicents1]

*snip*

In the interests of clarity, I'd appreciate it if you would decide if we're discussing hypotheticals or the details of this one specific case. You made a hypothetical argument; I replied with a hypothetical counter-argument. It's not really fair for you to dismiss my hypothetical response to your hypothetical with "well, that's not what actually happened." I know that's not what actually happened. We're discussing the abstract.

We're discussing both. I said I see no significant difference between this case in which the guy continuing to have sex with her after he knew she was unconscious and a hypothetical case in which they finished, then she passed out and he had sex with her again. (Note, not "no difference", no significant difference). I never moved into a hypothetical case in which he never realized that she had passed out, except to state that it would not be rape in that particular case.

[Dempublicents1]

I believe the reasonable among us came to something of an agreement that he wasn't raping her when she was unconscious but he didn't know, but he was raping her once he figured it out but continued anyway.

I'm not sure where you got this impression.

[Sdaeriji]

I believe the reasonable among us came to something of an agreement that he wasn't raping her when she was unconscious but he didn't know, but he was raping her once he figured it out but continued anyway.

I'm not sure where you got this impression.

Given that definition, could we say that the time between the girl passing out and the guy realizing she was passed out was not rape, but the time between the guy realizing she was passed out and the guy stopping was rape?

I would agree with this. (I dunno about NA or the law itself).

[Dempublicents1]

*snip*

So you and I agree that it is rape if he doesn't know and isn't rape if he does. That doesn't mean that anyone else in this thread agrees.

The people who have been arguing with me? People like Angleter and TPH? They haven't agreed to that. Angleter has, in fact, explicitly disagreed (I'm not sure about TPH). NA hasn't really expressed a definitive opinion.

[Redwulf]

....ah, so he's not a REAL rapist.

He's not the sort of person who is a serious threat to society and should be barred from other countries, if that's what you mean by 'REAL rapist'.

I beg to differ.

Am I the only one who thinks the reasonable thing to do when a sexual partner suddenly and unexpectedly looses consciousness is to make sure they aren't dying?

[Dempublicents1]

Why isn't the intercourse over when she passed out? After all, an unconscious person can't participate in sex any more than a fleshlight can.

The body can continue with the physical actions of sex after the conscious mind has stopped.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6540

How very odd. But its a single case of something very unusual happening in a situation that only 0.5% of adults. While this anonymous sleep-shagger's sleeping mind certainly sends her body off in search of sex, that doesn't mean any other woman's unconscious mind could make her body continue to participate in sex.

I think actually sleepwalking for sex is pretty rare, but I don't know that being able to respond sexually while unaware is necessarily all that rare. My husband and I have both done it, and it would be rather unlikely for both of us to be among 0.5% of the population like that. I've also had a friend start kind of groping me in my sleep while he was also asleep. I don't think it's all that unusual for people who regularly share a bed to be able to start sexual acts while asleep or to respond to them. And it can be difficult to know whether or not the other person is awake when something like that happens.

That said, it's rather irrelevant when the guy admits he knew she was unconscious.

[Dempublicents1]

....ah, so he's not a REAL rapist.

He's not the sort of person who is a serious threat to society and should be barred from other countries, if that's what you mean by 'REAL rapist'.

I beg to differ.

Am I the only one who thinks the reasonable thing to do when a sexual partner suddenly and unexpectedly looses consciousness is to make sure they aren't dying?

No. I mean, if she'd been drinking heavily, that's the most likely reason. But then, if it was enough for her to pass out during sex, she could have had alcohol poisoning, so he probably should have tried to wake her up to make sure she wasn't that far gone.