Oh no, I don't expect you to buy that it's all about me, I just don't see why in this case I should judge others differently than myself. I could have done it a few times, but I chose not to, regardless of how wasted I was. I'm not trying to paint you as evil or anything, but to call that an accident is lying to yourself, IMO.
What cloudz is describing and what seems to have happened in teh weird rape case seems world apart to me. One is a passionate but honest mistake. Mis-timing something that is tricky to time. Not intended. I'm sure MANY of us have done that or come close to doing it (pun intended). The other is blatant disregard for the wishes of another person. Not a mistake or mis-timing. It was intended and timed exactly as the man wanted it. While I agree that calling it "rape" does seem a bit off something worth punishing definitely happened.
1. Men can be feminists? 2. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZYU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZYU[/ame] 3. Sometimes when I read through threads like this I get the feeling that the female posters think all men are potential rapists. Makes me sad.
I can't speak for Cloudz but since I thanked some of his posts I'll give my view. Nothing I saw in the linked article from the Metro suggested he did what he did maliciously apart from a single small quote which, given my general disdain for journalism, I'm willing to accept could of been taken out of context. The later evidence adouglasmhor posted in the last page changed those facts and so my opinion on the case. I get why it was a rape conviction with that new piece of information. Before that though it seemed like a very crappy ruling with a lot of potential for abuse.
Dude, I think you're wrong. I don't blame you for not knowing the intimate details of my relationship though. I very much see it as an accident that happened to us as partners, it wasn't just my slip up, or my accident. We succeeded together and failed together. You were/ are seeing it as something one partner doing something off limits to the other. It was never like that. It wasn't that this thing was ever made "off limits", "no matter what" between myself and my partner. It was just more desirable under the circumstance we were having sex at the time. I recall one time we failed it was my partner who was more into continuing. Frankly overall I would say I was the one leading the safety issue, regards conception. There was never any deception on my part - we were both fully aware of either of us getting in the zone. At no point was there a breach of what the other wanted. At any time a partner could have indicated a change of course in the love making and it been followed. I have no problem having fun and being satisfied, finishing a different way. The thing that needs to be remembered is that this is two adults doing an activity they want to do. You can chat about it being best that you try to be safe. But when it comes to it you choose to continue and in doing so you accept the risk. This is all a joint venture. We just went through a phase were we both slacked off on the protection side of things. There's nothing about my experience where I have lied to myself. That's just a comment from someone who knows very little about how I think and interact. It's ok, I don't mind. You're not to know the circumstances of how I experienced this, unless I tell you. It's not about deception at all, not to myself or to my partner. I believe that's how it should be - you take shared responsibility if things don't go as planned. If you end up with a baby no one can simply just drop their responsibility for it. If one partner feels that strongly that it's totally off limits, it's a completely different ball game. First my belief is that if this is the case, you simply don't take this risk. We found out we couldn't really rely on ourselves 100% to use this method fairly soon. So that made us start to be more careful as a couple - it's a shared responsibility. If it was so off limits for one partner you just leave it. Or when the male partner is in the zone, the other one calls a change definitively both verbally and physically. What I don't believe should be allowed to happen is that ejaculation without consent, under whatever circumstances should be treated as tantamount to rape - in of itself. And that some kind of agreement can be set up between individuals that basically equals, "Ejaculation is off limits or else it's rape". I think we're dealing with rather marked difference in seriousness of offense here, and that needs addressing on some level.
To be honest Cloudz, I'm tired of arguing about this. You seem like a cool guy, and I generally agree with the majority of your posts. This is a one off, and very emotive case, and not one that I feel is worth you thinking of me as an adversary in the future. It's not like we're getting anywhere with this. Quits?
No worries, that's not how I feel about it. Of course if you still disagree with my explanation and think I acted selfishly, then sure I find it a bit disappointing that you read it that way. But it doesn't make me think of you as an adversary. You feel what you feel about this stuff, that's ok. But I wanted to explain purely because I don't want you thinking something that wasn't accurate from my perspective. I know that you're smart enough to appreciate that this is dependent on the relationship between two people and what goes on between them and that you can't expect that every situation or every person will feel the same. It really was no big deal for us. If that's not the case for you, then I can respect that, but likewise I expect to be respected in return for how I and my partner felt/feel about it between us. ps. I'm not suggesting that you have disrespected me or anything, and I would add that you seem like a cool guy too.
Of course I understand that if both parties are cool with it then it's a case of "no harm, no foul." And let's not forget, the fact I've been in a similar situation means I was dumb anyway. Removing oneself before one finishes is not guaranteed way to prevent fertilisation. Another angle is that a couple of times I've made a hasty withdrawal against my partner's wishes (though they've thanked me for it afterwards, as their wishes were made "in the heat of the moment").
There's nothing in the article that suggests the guy actually said those words or words to that effect. Unless I missed something the quote isn't actually attributed to anybody.
Confession time: I didn't read the article that was linked by adouglasmhor, only the quote. Now I've read it though, This bit: is attributed to him. Now for me at least, the "I'll do it if I want" is the issue. Since it says she didn't get a chance to do anything obviously he finished pretty much while he said it. If he'd just said he was coming inside her then I'd still be arguing against the ruling, since that's not really an unusual thing to say in the moment. However, his "I'll do it if I want" says to me he's not someone who got caught up in the feeling and forgot to withdraw. That's excusable. Instead he clearly knew he was deliberately acting against her wishes. The way I look at that is they had a verbal contract if you will and he deliberately broke it. I'm still hopping back and forth over whether I think it warrants such a label as rape and all that label entails, but he certainly did something that I would agree deserves punishment.
But is that her word against his or is he actually admitting flat out he holds that view? If she wanted him to stop. It's rape. Legally speaking. The difficulty with this case is the burden of proof.
That's the thing that's leaving me in the middle on this one now. Its the same problem you have with rape cases hat don't include video evidence though is its the woman's word against his. Compounded by the fact no one wants to be seen questioning apotential rape victim's integrity. Its perfectly possible its true, but its also possible she got ****ed and blagged what happened. To be honest, "I'll do what I want" is a really weird and specific thing to say while, the report suggests at least, he was riding the wave as it were.
Quite often in rape cases, medical evidence can be gathered. So far as I understand it if a man forces penetration there is quite often bruising left behind in the vagina. Even if the woman was relaxed and asleep at the time or unconscious. This is because during normal sex, the woman actually has to let you in. But this case is different. The penetration was consensual. It's one persons word against the other and that never really makes for a safe conviction. I think the CPS called it right the first time. While there is no excuse for rape. There is also no excuse for using rape law as a crutch to allow oneself to act irresponsibly. It might just be the printed media effect of looking for a story. But suspect cases where the woman really should have known better seem to be coming to the fore more frequently.
What? Anyway, it's most likely to be the posterior fourchette and labia minora that will be injured as a result of vaginal rape, not the vagina. Plus, some women will display injuries after voluntary sex, so minor anogenital injuries are not, in and of themselves, proof of rape.
Full findings of the Appeal Hearing here. Not for the squeamish, the guilty party sounds like a real charmer. http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/f-v-dpp-judgment.pdf
Yeah that's rape. Well I'd probably class their whole sexual relationship as one ongoing rape situation.
It is indeed rape. However for the life of me I can't imagine why a woman would continue in that sort of relationship given the initial sexual violence, the chance to exit the relationship, the fact she called a rape crisis line and went to the police? I can't make head nor tail of that. The saddest part of all though is it's not even uncommon for women to continue in these abusive relationships.
fear and cycles of abuse Some women will often initiate violent encounters in the latter part of relationships just to get the anticipation of violence out the way
