Is it rape / sexual assault?

[laowai1960]

Many years ago, I had a particular, consensual one-night-stand. A woman invited back to her place and after watching a movie, she said I could stay the night if I wanted. After saying I would, she asked whether I had a condom and I confirmed that I did.

 

We had a fairly long sex session after which we 'spooned' and chatted for 10 -  15 minutes. That is to say, we were laying on our sides with my front hard up against her back. She began moving / wriggling her bottom, I became aroused again, I penetrated her and we had another session - still in the position of my front up against her back.

 

Another 5 - 10 minutes of spooning followed the second session and then  she got up to  use the bathroom. She looked down at me and asked, probably more of a shriek, "Where's your condom?" I explained that, of course, I took the condom off after the first session.

 

She stormed into the bathroom and slammed the bathroom door. She stayed in the bathroom for 30 minutes or so and when she returned to the bedroom, she simply said, "You'd better go". I didn't say anything. I got dressed and left.

 

I felt remorseful about what had happened. It wasn't my intention to not use a condom; it was just a 'spur of the moment' type thing.

 

Some British Labour MPs are calling for a well-known individual to be extradited to Sweden so that investigations into allegations against him of rape and/or sexual assault can be concluded.

 

It is my understanding that the allegations, which involve consensual sex with two separate women on two separate occasions, are based on accusations that, during the course of sexual activity, the well-known individual removed his condom/s without each woman's knowledge or agreement.

 

Each country has its own laws and its own definitions of such laws but, generally speaking, rape is regarded as sexual penetration of a person without their consent and the lesser charge of sexual assault is regarded as a sexual act inflicted upon a person without their consent.

 

What I did with my 'one night stand' woman many years ago was wrong but I would have been shocked, and outraged, had I been charged with a criminal offence. Commensurately, I think that the potential prosecution of the well known individual for rape and/or sexual assault is too severe for what he reportedly did.

 

What do  you think?

[CharlieH]

For me its sexual assault, as the female clearly requested/asked if a condom was available. The consent in that context was based on the condom being used. To then proceed without it/one is wrong and she should have been made aware of it and given the choice. To proceed without it also put her at risk of possible unwanted pregnancy and decease.

[RJRS1301]

^{Did she at anytime say NO or request you cease penetration?}

 

^{You had an obligation to use a condom, as that had been requested the first time, and to confirm with her that she agreed to sex without a condom during the second session.}

 

^{There are varying laws in different countries regarding consent and not using a condom when the person believes one is in use..}

^{Not to mention the risk of sexually transmissible infections}  

 

[richard_smith237]

33 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

For me its sexual assault, as the female clearly requested/asked if a condom was available. The consent in that context was based on the condom being used. To then proceed without it/one is wrong and she should have been made aware of it and given the choice. To proceed without it also put her at risk of possible unwanted pregnancy and decease.

 

Agreed... And this works both ways.

 

A the girlfriend of a friend of mine stopped taking birth control (the 'Pill') for a short period of time and didn't tell my friend, they had been having consensual sex without a condom with the understanding that there was birth control in place. 

She became pregnant. My friend wanted to abort, his girlfriend didn't want to. 

They attended counseling, my friend was treated as being sub-human as if it was all his fault and he was the pariah for wanting to abort the pregnancy. 

He was told it was it was also his responsibility to ensure his girlfriend had continued to take birth control.

He was told by 'counseling and legal professionals' that's its not his decision and was pretty much excluded from any part of the process.

It was a tough time and my friend who was put through hell but chose to continue being himself and is now a great father to his daughter, still with his girlfriend, they now have a second child so it all worked out well. 

 

My take away from all of this is that when there is a choice to have penetrative sex both parties have also agreed to the possibility of pregnancy, both parties are responsible for the outcome, but only the woman carries greater physical burden and thus is the only one who can decided to abort. 

When one party changes things by not wearing a condom or not taking the pill unmentioned and undiscussed moral contract has been broken.... It's very much a grey area - but both actions are equally wrong.

 

I don't think this amounts to sexual assault and definitely not rape, but a moral code has been broken. 

The issues is greater than pregnancy with the risk of spread of disease too.

 

Ultimately, each situation is individual and there can't be a set of hard and fast rules, a set of check boxes or a contract each party signs...  Or can there?

 

At some point in the near future will we see a mobile phone app which both parties sign for proof of consent? But then what happens if half way though the woman (or man) changes their mind?

Record the whole event for proof of continued consent? then you need consent for filming !

 

It's a potential mine field but one where both sides require protection but must be treated equally without influence from the rising tide of feminism.

 

 

 

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, laowai1960 said:

What do  you think?

After reading your story I voted No.4.

That said the situation turned out difficult and the use of more condoms should of happened as she requested.

I can only say if she took it further you would been charged with assault and would say the judge would rule it so.

[carlyai]

A friend of mine said, that from his experience, women can tell if a condom is being used.

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk

[Lacessit]

5 minutes ago, carlyai said:

A friend of mine said, that from his experience, women can tell if a condom is being used.

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk
 

When the guy is behind her and she cannot see? Permit me to doubt.

Anything done during sex without consent is rape or sexual assault. The OP stepped over the line with the second sex session.

[carlyai]

Well, my friend informed me that when he and a friend took a female back to his room, she could tell when one of them took of his condom.

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk

[laowai1960]

On a side note, last year in Australia, a rape conviction, deliberated by a jury, was overturned on appeal, deliberated by  single judge.

 

It was reported that a woman consented to have sex with the accused man, in a one-night-stand situation. At one point during the sex, she was on her knees and he was behind her. During the course of things, he withdrew his penis from her vagina and penetrated her anus. It was reported that both sides agreed that the woman said, "Ow! That hurts." and a short while later, "You're hurting me."

 

Later, when the woman reunited with her girlfriend, she told her friend that her anus was sore. He friend told her that the anal penetration constituted rape and encouraged her to report the matter to Police.

 

The findings by the Appeal judge was that the woman's comments about pain were insufficient to communicate to the man that she wanted him to stop. Further, she did not undertake any physical action to try to end the activity.

 

Reverting back to my experience, would it not be reasonable for the woman to have known / expected that a condom would not be used twice? And, given that it was a second sex session after a break of 15 minutes or so, would the woman not have a responsibility to AGAIN request that a condom be used?

[carlyai]

I suppose, according to law, it's a grey or brownish area. :)

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk

[grollies]

The consensus seems to be that the OP is guilty of sexual assault, if not a rapist. What on earth are you posting this here (or anywhere) for?

[observer90210]

In such steamy situations, assuming people are drunk or tipsy, one can never be to careful what comes in, where you dig and what may come out ! ????

[carlyai]

The consensus seems to be that the OP is guilty of sexual assault, if not a rapist. What on earth are you posting this here (or anywhere) for?

Mark, lighten up.

The man had a duty of care to the woman, not to pass on any bugs to her and he should have worn a condom.

Equally, the woman had a duty of care to the man, not to pass on any bugs to him and to make sure he was wearing a condom.

How many people does it take to make a consensus?

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk

[OneMoreFarang]

How about: I won't come in your mouth. And then, in all that excitement, you do.

Now the same questions as above...

 

Personally I think if two people come together for sex then they do things together. And they accept that they can't always control everything if they don't look face to face to each other or if it's dark etc.

 

If a woman sees that a guy has no condom and he wants to penetrate her then she should clearly say NO and if necessary she should move away. If she closes her eyes and complains later he did something she didn't want that's not good enough!

 

If she tells him NO and moved away and he grabs her and with his (possibly) superior strength he penetrates her then that is at least assault and maybe rape. She should shout and she should hurt him, i.e. hit him or scratch him, to make her point 100% clear. If a guy then still ignores her he clearly did it against her will and he should be severely punished.

 

One of the points of the story with the famous guy is (at least as far as I remember) that she had again sex with him after the so called rape. That is for me a clear indicator there was no rape. I can't imagine that any woman who was really raped would like to have sex with that rapist soon after that so called rape.

 

Unfortunately some woman think they can use the "he raped me" to ruin a man's life. If he really raped her (like he has the scratch marks in his face when she tried to fight him off) he should go to jail.

If he walked out of the room and all was fine and sometime later she decides that that was rape then it wasn't really rape - at least IMHO.

[grollies]

On 4/16/2019 at 2:52 PM, carlyai said:

Mark, lighten up.

The man had a duty of care to the woman, not to pass on any bugs to her and he should have worn a condom.

Equally, the woman had a duty of care to the man, not to pass on any bugs to him and to make sure he was wearing a condom.

How many people does it take to make a consensus?

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk
 

Well the OP put the subject up with a poll, almost like asking for a jury opinion.....here on TVF....which is what amazed me. How many? A normal jury is 12 people, shame he didn't get more responses. You seem to think it a big joke, others disagree suggesting sexual assault to him just being a bit of a <deleted>.

 

Also I would ask that you not use my name on these boards, it's supposed to be an anonymous forum.

 

Thanks.

[BritManToo]

I always refuse to have sex with a condom as I prefer not to risk my immortal soul.

I've only encountered one woman that chose not to proceed.

[poohy]

I Have never used a condom so I dont know what all the fuss is about

 

IMHO most women prefer it bareback

[CharlieH]

I always thought it would be akin to having a warm shower with a raincoat coat on !

 

Tried a condom once and never again, would rather go without than wear one of those.

[Berkshire]

Interesting question.  I actually read about this recently.  This act appears to be common enough that it even have a name...."stealthing."  Young men in America were doing it for kicks.  It would appear that many jurisdictions are grappling with the idea of making it criminal.  Like Singapore....

 

[The second reading of the bill is set for this coming May, and when it becomes law, Singapore will be the first country in Asia where the act of stealthing is against the law.]

https://www.vice.com/en_asia/article/8xy5vb/singapore-is-about-to-make-stealthing-illegal

 

Apparently it's already illegal in Germany...

 

[A German police officer has been found guilty of sexual assault for removing a condom during sexual intercourse without the consent of his partner, an act known as "stealthing," in what is believed to be the first case of its kind to be prosecuted in Germany.]

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/20/health/stealthing-germany-sexual-assault-scli-intl/index.html

 

But it would seem to be very much a he-said/she-said sort of thing.  How can a woman prove that he did it without her consent?  It's hard enough to prove rape, and now we have a "sex without a condom" crime.  Wonder if it will ever come to Thailand?  I can imagine that if this act is tied to some kind of payoff, it will encourage women to report it whether true or not.  Anyways.....    

 

[bermondburi]

It's not rape, and it's not sexual assault. 

 

Can't believe some of the replies here.

 

 

[impulse]

Ask Julian Assange what he thinks... 

 

I'll bet he wishes he'd put his on.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎4‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 5:26 PM, richard_smith237 said:

It's a potential mine field but one where both sides require protection but must be treated equally without influence from the rising tide of feminism.

Humans being fallible will always make mistakes and do things they shouldn't. When sex comes in to the picture it becomes even more fraught.

Perhaps the Muslims are correct in that unmarried people should never be alone in a room together, but that's never going to be acceptable in the west.

Perhaps the best answer is that before having sex the couple should be together on what happens if a pregnancy occurs, as birth control can and does fail. If the woman says no abortion, walk away, but that's too logical for real life, so situations as in the OP will continue.

No man should be able to order a woman to abort his baby, but if she refuses to do so, he should not have to pay to raise it.

 

IMO it's neither rape nor sexual assault,  but if he had sex without a condom when she made it clear one should be used, he should be charged under some sort of criminal statute, and be liable to pay for either the abortion, or raising the child.

 

Re the Assange situation, that is political and he's screwed. IMO the Swedish thing is a frame by the Americans, so not really relevant for this discussion.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, bermondburi said:

It's not rape, and it's not sexual assault. 

 

Can't believe some of the replies here.

 

 

Agreed, but it is criminal. Pregnancy has implications for women that no man can understand.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎4‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 1:07 AM, poohy said:

I Have never used a condom so I dont know what all the fuss is about

 

IMHO most women prefer it bareback

How would you feel if you had it off with some strange woman on the spur of the moment and got AIDS, or syphilis, or herpes.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎4‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 12:57 AM, BritManToo said:

I always refuse to have sex with a condom as I prefer not to risk my immortal soul.

I've only encountered one woman that chose not to proceed.

Which attitude is responsible for the spread of sexual diseases.

[grollies]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Humans being fallible will always make mistakes and do things they shouldn't. When sex comes in to the picture it becomes even more fraught.

Perhaps the Muslims are correct in that unmarried people should never be alone in a room together, but that's never going to be acceptable in the west.

Perhaps the best answer is that before having sex the couple should be together on what happens if a pregnancy occurs, as birth control can and does fail. If the woman says no abortion, walk away, but that's too logical for real life, so situations as in the OP will continue.

No man should be able to order a woman to abort his baby, but if she refuses to do so, he should not have to pay to raise it.

 

IMO it's neither rape nor sexual assault,  but if he had sex without a condom when she made it clear one should be used, he should be charged under some sort of criminal statute, and be liable to pay for either the abortion, or raising the child.

 

Re the Assange situation, that is political and he's screwed. IMO the Swedish thing is a frame by the Americans, so not really relevant for this discussion.

So, if there was no pregnancy, or STD transmitted without using a condom what statute should any prosecution come under? 

[OneMoreFarang]

27 minutes ago, grollies said:

So, if there was no pregnancy, or STD transmitted without using a condom what statute should any prosecution come under? 

Nothing to prosecute, case closed.

 

What I find strange with this discussion is that we are talking here about two people who decided to have sex with each other. These are normally not strangers. They know each other and trust each other enough to have sex with each other.

 

Is it really necessary that all details of this encounter have to be discussed up front and agreed to? Is doggy style allowed of does she maybe think that is demeaning? How about oral sex? Is that part of the deal or must if be discussed up front?

I am sure we can all list lot of details which one partner might like and the other not so much.

 

Let's say partner A starts to do something and partner B does not like it. And then? Probably partner B says something like: I don't want that and partner A understands it and doesn't do it. Or partner A gets upset. So the sex is over and they put their clothes on again. And maybe they agree that they are incompatible in that way. And maybe one of them leaves.

I think all that is no problem.

 

Now if one of them does not accept the NO from the other then he or she maybe tries to use force. And that is obviously not acceptable anymore. So maybe he tries to penetrate her and she slaps him in the face. And maybe he hits her back.

Let's remember, we are still talking about two people who minutes ago wanted to have sex together.

 

If they disagree so much that they start physical fights then there are already laws to handle that situation.

[Guest]

Here's one to consider. It might read like a joke at first, but give it some thought...

 

A man and a woman meet. They get to know each other. They agree to date. They have sex. The woman then discovers that the man lied the whole time. He said he was a single medical student looking for a long-term relationship, but it turned out he was a married bartender who was using her for a fling.

 

Is it rape? Sexual assault? A lesser crime of "trickery?"

 

I'm not being entirely facetious here. This sort of emotional deception can be devastating. And on some level, the woman never agreed to have sex with that man. She agreed to have sex with a single doctor looking for a relationship.

 

The OP raises an interesting scenario, and I think he has some soul-searching to do. But I'll also take him at his word that there was no intent to violate the woman's wishes. He was reckless, and he should've been more clear. But there's no crime here--only a misunderstanding.

 

In my scenario, there's no "misunderstanding"--only deception for the purpose of obtaining sex under false pretenses. 

 

I've been in positive relationships where my partner crossed the line in intimate situations, and misinterpreted what I was comfortable with. By some mainstream interpretations, and by the letter of the law in many places, I was the victim of sexual assault. But I never considered it a crime. On the other hand, I have been with partners who turned out to be terrible, manipulative people. I can't make an allegation of assault in those cases, but I feel far, far more violated.

 

On 4/18/2019 at 11:41 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

Humans being fallible will always make mistakes and do things they shouldn't. When sex comes in to the picture it becomes even more fraught.

Good point. I like that the #MeToo movement brought attention to some of the real predators out there. But at the same time it sometimes led to a frenzy where every little transgression (including clearly good-faith misunderstandings) became public fodder if it involved a celebrity. The Aziz Ansari accusations were particularly head-scratching. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 11:24 PM, grollies said:

So, if there was no pregnancy, or STD transmitted without using a condom what statute should any prosecution come under? 

No idea, but if a guy has sex devoid of condom ( without her knowledge ) when the woman stated she wanted one used the guy is a scumbag, and she would be within her rights to give him a good kicking in the goolies.

[Pravda]

Yes, it was very rapey.

 

How cum you're not in jail?