I told some people about an experience I had and they all said it was rape but I'm not sure I agree. I just want to understand the definition.
I had said to my boyfriend several times I didn't want to have sex and that I wanted to go to sleep. I said no very clearly. I don't mind if he uses my body to get off but I didn't want to have penetrative sex because I was tired and not aroused, which means sex can rip my vagina and make sex feel like sandpaper. I made it clear that I didn't want to have penetrative sex. But he kept putting his penis in a little bit and then I'd get annoyed and say no, and every time he insisted that it was an accident. But I was starting to feel like it's bullshit, clearly not an accident. So the last time he does it I get visibly frustrated and angry and say "no, I don't want to do this, I told you I don't want to have penetrative sex". Then I decide to go to sleep and go completely limp, wait until he stops. I knew there was a possibility he would try to enter me and I thought, I'll see if it's really an accident. He noticed I wasn't responding or moving, because he asked if I was ok, but I just ignored him and tried to sleep. I was just really annoyed, but thought to myself, fuck you if you choose to do this. Then a few minutes later he entered me completely, ejaculated, and went to sleep. But I could've stopped him at any time by saying no again, at least temporarily. I could've shoved him off me. I was just so annoyed that he wasn't respecting my numerous original nos. I was limp the entire time, but not frozen. I was in control.
I felt annoyed because he was always saying that entering me a little bit was an accident. So I told some people and they say this is rape. But I do not feel raped, just annoyed. How is it a rape if I could've said no (again and again) and he would've stopped each time? I knew I was giving up and that him entering me was a possibility. I don't get it.
>>17208065
>he would've stopped each time? I knew I was giving up
Was he really stopping before? Come on.
Rape doesn't have to be a traumatic experience. It's non consensual sex. He had sex with you without your consent. You made it abundantly clear that you did NOT consent. How could giving up and not saying anything be interpreted as you suddenly consenting?
Rape is about consent, not about the presence of a "no". It's "yes means yes".
Consent can be given non verbally, but that is absolutely not the case here.
>>17208065
why are you still with this jackass
>>17208093
He stopped trying to enter me. I didn't mind groping or anything like that. It was like 2-3 minutes between each time he tried to enter me after saying no. If I'd said no after he entered me completely, I am pretty sure he would've taken it out. Basically, if I'd kept saying no the sex wouldn't have happened.
>>17208100
Did you say or imply yes, you would like to have sex? A lack of an answer is not an answer. From his perspective, you fell asleep.
Why would he think your answer had changed after you had said no so many times?
>>17208065
>I was in control
>I couldn't have shoved him off of me
You could have gotten up and walked out, of course rape is non-consensual sex. But honestly you could have just walked it, you made the decision to see if he would do it, then you took it rather then dealing with bullshit anymore. This guy is a piece of shit, but calling this rape is doing shame to what rape actually is.
It wasn't rape. Your bf was being kind of a dick obviously but the two aren't one and the same. People who insist this counts as rape are trivializing the awful shit actual rape victims have gone through, and don't know (usually) or simply don't care (not as often) how insensitive they're being.
>>17208143
That's what I'm thinking (doing shame to what rape actually is). I could've walked away or even used words to continue stopping it. I don't understand why people were so insistent that it was rape. I also feel like it takes away women's agency, who could've gotten up and left but made a choice to lazily stay in bed knowing what could happen.
>>17208147
The weird thing is I was being told this by girls who had been raped. Though I don't know the specifics, I think one was actually forcible. Maybe the others were situations where they could've gotten away. I know some girls even count situations where they were too meek to say no as rape.
>>17208065
>How is it a rape if I could've said no (again and again) and he would've stopped each time?
But... he didn't stop. At all. He just kept doing it over and over again. Until you gave up saying no because it was clearly having no effect. Which is rape.
Congratulations that you don't feel raped, but this guy is a piece of shit and you should kick him to the curb.
>>17208100
>Basically, if I'd kept saying no the sex wouldn't have happened.
Once should have been enough. You shouldn't have to remind someone every couple of minutes that you still stand by your original statement that you don't want to have penetrative sex throughout this entire evening. And you definitely shouldn't have to restate that due to the fact that he's already taken it upon himself to violate that physical boundary explicitly without any word from you that it's okay.
>>17208147
Just because some rape is more or less bad than others doesn't mean it doesn't count as non consensual sex.
I wouldn't bring this guy to court, but that doesn't mean this was consensual sex.
>>17208177
If it'd been actual rape why wouldn't you bring this guy to court? (Because it's not actual rape in the legal or moral sense.)
The fact that you don't feel raped is nothing but luck.
What if you weren't chill about it? What if you really had been frozen? What if you really had just fallen asleep or passed out, and this guy sneaks the opportunity to do something to your body that you had specifically and repeatedly told him every couple of minutes that he wasn't allowed to do?
Maybe you don't feel raped, and that's great, but his actions are absolutely consistent with rape. And if he doesn't get his shit together, then that's what it'll become at some point, because he clearly doesn't give a fuck about what his partner wants or doesn't want.
If I sneak into my friend's house at night and steal his TV, am I suddenly not a thief anymore just because it turns out he doesn't really care? Does that remotely change the fact that I broke into someone's house with intention of depriving them of their possessions, with no care for the fact that this might have severe consequences for them?
>>17208195
Because the legal system is a huge bother and very expensive.
I wouldn't think it was worth it.
I would have a conversation about it and name it as non consensual sex to his face. I would let him know how unacceptable this was.
Rape is non consensual sex. Yes or no?
>>17208195
Not that guy but going to court is a massive hassle, and pursuing even the most clear cut of rape cases in America is pretty much pointless.
And there are fucking loads of things one could take someone to court for that many people don't bother with, that's not a measure of legitimacy in the least. Every get into a physical fight with a friend? When was the last time you charged one of them with assault?
If my drug addled nephew steals my piece of shit car and I choose not to report it because it'd cause too much family drama or because I feel sorry for him or because I'm scared of his gang or because I had been trying to unload the car onto someone for months and he accidentally did me a favour etc, that doesn't mean my property wasn't stolen.
>>17208162
Sadly I'm not surprised. That's actually precisely why calling an incident rape when it wasn't will eventually lead to bad things once enough people start doing it. You sound like you have your head on straight. Good on you.
>>17208177
I'm not trying to insist it was consensual sex. What I am saying is that this was not rape. Is your thinking so cripplingly black and white that you cannot see there's a difference?
>>17208162
>I know some girls even count situations where they were too meek to say no as rape.
If a man is having sex with someone who's that meek, he's most likely being a rapist.
>>17208224
How do you define rape?
>>17208224
>I'm not trying to insist it was consensual sex. What I am saying is that this was not rape.
Rape is by definition non consensual sex. So if you're saying it's not rape, you're by definition saying it was consensual.
It could be equally said to be black and white thinking to presume all acts of rape must be trauma inducing.
>>17208204
Uhh yeah. If course it does. Duh. If your friend doesn't give a shit, then it changes "breaking in and stealing his tv" to "coming over and calling dibs on his tv living at your place from now on since doesn't give a fuck about it anyway". Have you not ever had any normal social interaction or what's your deal??
>>17208241
Probably responding to a joke but there are girls like this out there. Often they're trying to impress the guy, or are so people pleasing that they won't say no outright. Instead they'll send very vague signals that they don't want to fuck, that the guy isn't guaranteed to get. Then they talk about feeling raped afterwards, sometimes years later. Like, why don't you just stand up for yourself? People should be telling them to do that, not enabling them.
People need to stop thinking of rape as this otherworldly boogyman. It's just another crime.
If you punch me in the face, that's assault.
If you take my stuff without permission, that's theft.
If you perform sexual acts on me without my consent, that's rape/sexual assault.
How much I happen to give a shit about any one of them is just a matter of the luck of the prick who's doing it to me. But if you're going to take the gamble and do any of that to anyone, you're probably a piece of shit.
>>17208242
Being forcibly sexually violated after your personal agency has been completely physically suspended or restrained, leaving you with no control whatsoever over the situation, and this all despite your having clearly expressed prior that you don't consent to engaging in the sexual act.
>>17208250
If rape wasn't trauma inducing there wouldn't be laws against it, now would there? Seriously who the fuck are you to try and tell an adult who doesn't feel as if they were raped that they actually were just because it fits your definition of the word? Why would you actively try to put that on somebody?? Are you a sadist? Does it not occur to you at all that perhaps your definition might be a little warped and in need of being revisited and likely revised? Jfc anon, this kind of shit is basic common sense.
>>17208267
This. This this this a thousand times this.
I agree you OP that you were not raped. You described that you were in control. You described that you reacted out of anger and annoyance, not out of fear and threats of violence. From this we can say without any doubt that you were not raped. You were repeatedly asked to do something and in the end you accepted. No matter how often someone ask something or how irritating they become, it still doesn't become forced unless there is threats of violence and lack of control. From your point of view, we cannot say that you were raped. From the point of view of the boyfriend, we can say that he really lacks respect. I strongly recommend that you do not accept such behavior. It seems you were not comfortable with expressing anger and instead you ended up trying to ignore the situation, which caused you to accept behavior that in retrospective you should not have accepted. You may have personal difficulties at expressing anger, even when such anger is justified.
>>17208267
There's a world of important difference between participating in sex that one doesn't particularly want to have, and actually being raped.
If someone genuinely wants what's happening to stop, it's usually pretty easy to tell without them having to autistically spell out "I Do Not Consent To This Activity, Stop Now, In Perpetuity And Throughout The Universe". To say the onus is always on someone to explicitly say no is just as autistic and against how humans interact as saying the onus is always on someone to explicitly ask if every little thing they do is okay.
If someone is smiling politely through a boring party conversation with a few too-subtle hints that they want to slip away, then they're by default consenting to being bored to death and that's their problem, no matter how unpleasant it is. They haven't said 'yes', but there's still consent.
If instead, this person says "Well, it was nice seeing you, I'm heading off" and walks away, they've reasonably expressed the desire for the conversation to close and are no longer consenting by default. Let's say the bore misses this and pursues them out the door. This person then says "Well, I'm going home now, goodbye." Again, very clear disengagement without directly saying no. Except the bore follows them home. "Well, I'm turning in. Have a safe trip home!" but as they shut the door, the bore casually pushes on through still yammering the fuck on. By this point we've pushed well past understandable social mis-steps and missed signals. No one has said 'yes' or 'no', but any reasonable person would understand that the partygoer is not consenting to this intrusion - this heartless bore just doesn't care.
The former in both cases happens literally all the time and is pretty much a fact of life people have to deal with one form or another. But the second is a very different thing, on the surface easily confused for the first.
>>17208316
>If rape wasn't trauma inducing there wouldn't be laws against it, now would there?
Are you retarded?
Saying something isn't traumatic every single time isn't the same as saying it's never traumatic.
>your definition of the word
You mean THE definition.
>Why would you actively try to put that on somebody?? Are you a sadist?
Are you a retard?
I'm not telling her what to feel. I'm telling her what he did, by definition. She can feel any way she likes about it.
I wasn't crying about it when my house got broken into, and some people shoot on sight or move away over that shit. Doesn't change the fact that there wasn't a person in my house who had no right to be there.
I have friends who've treated being mugged like being told their phone battery died, doesn't mean they didn't walk their bare feet to the nearest police station and report that they'd been the victim of a crime.
>>17208377
>any reasonable person would understand that the partygoer is not consenting to this intrusion
I disagree. I can conceive a situation where a person expresses that they are on their way to leave but still want to exchange last-second communication before they are out the door. It is a thing that can happen. Therefore I cannot say within reasonable doubt that someone expresses they do cease all communicate just because they expresses they are about to leave and begin doing so. I expect such a person to say "I don't want to talk" like a mature individual. In your given scenario if the partygoer exchanged words, even if timidly and warily, then any reasonable person would agree that the partygoer was consenting to the conversation.
>>17208316
Woah man. I'm not advocating sending this guy to jail or anything. I do think using the r-word would have value in scaring him into being a decent human being. Because his current behavior makes him a big risk to actually raping someone who isn't so passive about it.
There are different types of rape. Coercive rape. Violent rape. Date rape. Stranger rape. Just because one is worse than the other doesn't mean it's not non consensual sex.
They're going to have different outcomes and punishments
>>17208421
>I do think using the r-word would have value in scaring him into being a decent human being
You do not incorrectly accuse people of a major crime just because you want to scare them into being a decent human being.
>Because his current behavior makes him a big risk to actually rape
His current behavior is to lack respect and he should be told that he lacks respect. There is no need to drag an imaginary future crime into the equation.
>>17208385
>Saying something isn't traumatic every single time isn't the same as saying it's never traumatic.
the point
---------------
your head
>You mean THE definition.
Nope. What I meant was exactly what I said.
>I'm not telling her what to feel. I'm telling her what he did, by definition. She can feel any way she likes about it.
By your definition. Which, again, who the fuck are you to try and insist you know what happened better than the person directly involved in what happened?
>I wasn't crying about it when my house got broken into, and some people shoot on sight or move away over that shit. Doesn't change the fact that there wasn't a person in my house who had no right to be there.
Cool story and all but why bother presenting a false equivalence?
>I have friends who've treated being mugged like being told their phone battery died, doesn't mean they didn't walk their bare feet to the nearest police station and report that they'd been the victim of a crime.
More cool stories. Know what rape that isn't traumatic and forced is called? Sex.
>>17208364
I did express anger properly before giving up. I was just frustrated because he said it was an accident and I didn't believe him, but was going to see if he was telling the truth and was willing to accept whatever happened to find out.
>>17208405
>I expect such a person to say "I don't want to talk" like a mature individual.
The world isn't made of mature individuals. What if the partygoer's boring father beat him over the head with Moby Dick as a child any time he asked his dad to be quiet, and now he has a complex about offending people? Does that mean he's just an acceptable target and we as a society have no duty to protect the very kind of vulnerable person that a serial borer would knowingly target?
And why is the onus on the partygoer to be mature and clear? Why is it not on the borer to say "I'm not boring you, am I?"
Especially when the borer is the one who's shown an aptitude for openly speaking his mind and comfort with flouting social grace, and has taken the leading role in the conversation. Why is there no examination of one the valuable thing he mysteriously failed to say, when he was the driving force of the entire conversation?
>within reasonable doubt
While it's certainly possible in any given case that the bore didn't mean to do it, do you deny the very possibility that he could have meant to?
>>17208443
Sounds like something's touched a nerve.
Hahaha... what the fuck OP..
In control.. what a joke.
If you say NO it's no.. you can't penetrate someone by accident how fucking retarded are you?
Jesus christ >_<
>>17208443
OP experienced non consensual sex. Yes or no?
OP, please, just tell me you're going to break up with him at least. Rape or not rape, doesn't matter, he's a fucking douche.
The fact that your friends think your boyfriend is a rapist should at least suggest to you that he's not exactly a peach.
>>17208195
Cause she said she was just annoyed and felt disrespected, not angry and hurt enough to bring shit to court.
Why are you trying to argue for the sake of arguing?
Totally rape. Maybe rape-lite or diet rape, but definitely rape. This dude used you like an old sock. I mean how many times do you have to say no?
Guy sounds like a jerk. Dump him. But it doesn't sound like you will because you didn't even have the guts to walk away from a dude who was gently raping you and sleep on the couch.
>>17208443
>the point
>---------------
>your head
Then explain.
>Which, again, who the fuck are you to try and insist you know what happened better than the person directly involved in what happened?
A person who understands words.
>Know what rape that isn't traumatic and forced is called? Sex.
>and forced
Oh hello goalposts, you look different, have you done something with your hair?
>>17208224
If its not consensual, it's rape, are u a fuckin retard?
>>17208065
Wtf do other people's opinion matter on this? Sure it might have technically been but who cares, as long as you don't feel that way about it.
>>17208421
>Woah man.
It's whoa. Yes I'm being petty, that just bugs the shit out of me for some reason every time I see it.
>I do think using the r-word would have value in scaring him into being a decent human being.
Do you understand how horribly irresponsible and shitty that is? Don't be one of those "ends justify the means" people. Those myopic cunts always get it wrong and fuck shit up because they can't into foresight. Please don't be that.
>Because his current behavior makes him a big risk to actually raping someone who isn't so passive about it.
Except it doesn't. Ffs OP even stated outright that had she told him more firmly and definitively to knock it the fuck off he would've stopped.
>less passive about it
>at greater risk of getting raped
>...wut
>>17208485
>had she told him more firmly and definitively to knock it the fuck off he would've stopped.
She's no more psychic than we are.
>>17208065
Why didn't you just suck his dick, getting blue balled is worst then rape.
>>17208446
I agree, you expressed anger properly until the point where you up. When you reached that point, I think we must come to the conclusion that you made a mistake.
>but was going to see if he was telling the truth and was willing to accept whatever happened to find out.
I think this is the core of the issue. If you were willing to accept whatever happened that means you were willing to have penetrative sex despite not being sexual excited. Therefore we can conclude that you intentionally did not communicate properly, not during the entire sexual interaction but past a certain point. We could say you intentionally communicated consent to sexual activities, under certain conditions, and you intentionally did not withdraw consent when the conditions were not met. I understand that you are not a bad person and that this only happened because you were particularly pissed. We all have bad moods that make us communicate improperly. However it's important to avoid playing mind games in relationship. It can only hurt everybody involved.
>>17208450
>What if the partygoer's boring father beat him over the head with Moby Dick as a child any time he asked his dad to be quiet, and now he has a complex about offending people?
If a person suffers personal trauma that makes them communicate consent improperly then they are still communicating consent. People can only know as much as they are told. You are discussing whether a mentally distraught individual is FEELING consent when communicating it, which is a separate issue and which only matters in a discussion about whether a person is actively hurting themselves, not being hurt by others. I am not a monster. It pains me when someone has personal issues that makes them communicate consent when they are not comfortable. But this really, really has nothing to do with this conversation.
>>17208515
Why is she to blame for being worn down? She made a debatable mistake once. He blatantly went against her wishes consistently and repeatedly every few minutes.
She might have debatably done something wrong, but he did literally nothing right.
It's retarded to suggest her communication was at fault here when she repeatedly, very clearly said no, and he continuously ignored her.
None of this is me speaking as to whether or not it was rape, it's just me speaking as to whether he's a flaming asshole and 100% at fault, which is absolutely undebatable in my view.
>>17208453
Yes, harmful fucktards who can't into basic critical reasoning nor social mechanics yet parade about thinking themselves masters at both trigger the fuck out of me. I can't even say I'm amazed it took you this long to pick up on that.
>>17208455
See >>17208224
>>17208465
Try reading the thread. Or just following the post chain back up. I've addressed all this shit already, I'm not doing it again.
>>17208467
Oh ffs you lazy mofos RTFT >>17208316
>>17208502
No but she's about 1000 times less fucking autistic.
>>17208515
I didn't "intentionally not communicate". I told him explicitly and angrily that I did not want him to penetrate me (after saying so previously several times), and went to sleep. I had never given consent for penetration, I had always told him anything but penetration was ok but that I absolutely did not want penetration. I always said "no penetration at all tonight". And I stopped him every time he tried before I decided to go to sleep. Never did I give consent. He was telling me that he accidentally was putting it in too far, so I decided to see if he was telling the truth. If he had been he would've apologized and taken it out once he realized. But he didn't, instead he just went all in. So I found out that he'd been lying about accidentally penetrating me against my wishes. Nothing was a lack of communication. I made my wishes very clear, "no penetration at all tonight".
>>17208553
>Why is she to blame for being worn down?
Because she should have put a stop to the activity before being worn down and making a judgment call that was emotionally compromised. People should avoid this in any situation, not just in bed. If anything is wearing you down then end it before you make a wrong judgment call under duress. Whatever judgment call you make under duress, which can range from a verbal beatdown to downright murder, cannot be justified. If that judgment call hurts others then you have hurt others, if that judgment call hurts you then you have hurt yourself.
>it's just me speaking as to whether he's a flaming asshole and 100% at fault
I agree that he is a flaming asshole. I cannot agree that he is 100% at fault. He would be 100% at fault if the same situation would have happened if he was with any other girl. Can we truthfully say that? This girl said that she was willing to accept whatever happened during the sexual activity to find out whether her partner was lying about performing coitus by mistake. If a different girl had reacted in a different manner, wouldn't it have produced a different outcome?
>>17208566
>so I decided to see if he was telling the truth
>by intentionally ceasing to communicate
I think that's what anon is getting at. It doesn't invalidate all or any of the communication efforts you put forth before that point though.
>>17208566
>Nothing was a lack of communication.
I understand that you have correctly communicated that you didn't consent to penetration. When I talk about a lack of communication I am mostly thinking of this scene
>I could've stopped him at any time by saying no again, at least temporarily. I could've shoved him off me. I was just so annoyed that he wasn't respecting my numerous original nos.
When I read these sentence it speaks to me about a lack of communication. You did not want the activity to continue, you could communicate it and you didn't.
I think if we want to get to the bottom of the issue then we need to confront your real motivations. At time you speak of going limp because you were "so annoyed that he wasn't respecting my numerous original nos", and at other time you speak of going limp because you wanted to test him. That is two different answers. You have to pick one. In the first one you are too angry to communicate, in the second one you intentionally cease to communicate.
>>17208539
You're ignoring the rest of the thought, the fact that these kind of damaged people are exactly the kind who are targeted by people explicitly seeking to do harm, because they're less likely to fight back.
It is possible for an innocent person to unknowingly step over a damaged person's line, but in many scenarios it'll be much more likely that they're doing it knowingly.
Breaking the illusion of this masterful analogy for a moment, shitloads of rape victims don't understand that what's happened to them is even rape because they think that if it's their boyfriend it doesn't count, or because they grew up like that and just think it's part of life, or because they were visibly too scared to say no.
If you're fucking someone who's in tears and never think to stop and ask what's up, you're probably raping them. And anyone who's not a genuine rapist probably won't find themselves in that situation, because no one is that socially retarded.
There are innumerable scenarios where there may never be a 'no' and it's still clearly rape. The majority of communication is non-verball, that doesn't suddenly go out the window as soon as someone takes their pants off. That doesn't mean there aren't also scenarios of honest miscommunications when the stars align between two complete social retards, but it's just deluded to pretend most people are pure innocents who bumble into accidental rape, and pretty gross to excuse that level of social retardation at the expense of the milder retardation of being too scared to say no.
>>17208597
If you tell a group of kids outside your house "stop egging my house" every time they throw an egg, for half an hour, and they stop but then continue throwing once you've sat down again, and then you decide "fuck it, fuck them", and they throw the rest of the eggs, the failure to communicate is not on your end. They knew you didn't want the eggs on your house. A failure to communicate would be like not telling someone you didn't want something. Not repeatedly telling them and then deciding fuck it, I've made myself clear enough. Because the message had already been made as clearly as it ever would be.
>>17208554
Jesus christ, get off the internet you crazy fucker, listen to some new age tapes or something.
>>17208566
There's that tasty backbone, you tell him OP!
>>17208605
>When I read these sentence it speaks to me about a lack of communication. You did not want the activity to continue, you could communicate it and you didn't.
I didn't because he said that his continuations were an accident. If he'd been telling the truth, he would've apologized and stopped. He wasn't telling the truth.
I had communicated many times that I didn't want any of that happening at any point during the night. I fought many advances. It's not a lack of communication. You shouldn't have to tell somebody, "I never want to be spit on" every two minutes and when you stop saying it once and they spit on you, it doesn't mean you were failing to communicate. What needed to be communicated had been, several times.
I was limp because of annoyance that he was continuing because I didn't believe him when he said it was an accident. I also wanted to see if he was telling the truth. They are not mutually exclusive.
>>17208585
>Because she should have put a stop to the activity before being worn down
She did. She said very blatantly "no". End of story. Her wishes were well known.
Consent doesn't come down to who's willing to fight to the death over it. She said no.
>>17208612
>the fact that these kind of damaged people are exactly the kind who are targeted by people explicitly seeking to do harm
This fact is entirely irrelevant to this conversation. It is always your responsibility to be mature and clear. I'm not saying that body language doesn't exist. I'm not saying it's alright to ignore body language. I'm not saying that bad people don't exist. However I can say that if body language doesn't successfully communicate an information, including lack of consent, then then you need to vocalize that information. If you don't vocalize it then you are personally responsible for what happens or what continues to happen. I have no say whether a person was mislead or intentionally harmful in a given scenario when I lack the information to draw such a conclusion. Body language can fail and I cannot tell if it has failed unless I was present. All I can do is laud the merit of proper communication.
>>17208614
I get what you're saying and I'm on your side here. In the scenario you've just put forth, the little faggots would get about 2 eggs + warnings in before I filled a super soaker with vinegar and chased them off until the whole squirtgun was empty. That's where we differ. You communicated your stance perfectly clearly. There was a point at which you decided fuck this noise and stopped, yes, but your bf should've been able to get the picture well before that point. He knew he could try to get away with it anyway, you knew he was trying to get away with it anyway, you could've stopped him if you really wanted to so the situation was under control, and you have full rights to tell him that was a right prick move he pulled and demand an hour long back massage or whatever to make up for it.
>>17208650
>It is always your responsibility to be mature and clear.
So people who are damaged in a way that makes them dangerous to others are fine. People who are damaged in a way that makes them susceptible to danger are on their own.
>>17208511
>blueballed
Or you could wrap your hand around your dick and move it up and down... It's called masterbation. I've never been blueballed.
>>17208065
did you/ do you intend to press charges?
if you answered no to this question, you were not raped
You were penetrated sexually against your consent. That's the legal definition for rape. It doesn't matter whether you were "in control" or not. Though it's great you felt like you were in control, you clearly weren't. He kept insisting every time you said no. You don't penetrate someone by accident either. He disregarded your physical integrity. He used you like a sex doll. It's utterly disgusting. This is the only truth.
>>17208667
Oh the sjws are just gonna have a field day with you lmao
>>17208628
She said no to penetration but she didn't say no to this:
>I don't mind if he uses my body to get off
I am talking about this activity in general. She said yes to this. He could use her body to get off. This activity was wearing her down. She should have called it off. He was doing it wrong, intentionally or unintentionally, and it was pissing her off, but she never called off. She should have. She really should.
I want to communicate the importance of putting an end to an activity that is pissing you off but I do not want to communicate that this girl didn't say no to penetration. I do recognize that she said no to penetration.
>>17208667
>hurr I'm a retard and don't know how the world works
Honestly, the way the system is, someone who's lying has more incentive to report rape than someone who's telling the truth. Intense scrutiny and questions won't mean shit to someone who just wants to get attention, play the victim and/or paint someone as evil. Going through that when you've already had a genuinely horrible experience just isn't worth it to most people.
>>17208675
Hurr
>>17208680
>She said no to penetration but she didn't say no to this:
>>I don't mind if he uses my body to get off
Okay? He didn't use her body to get off, he penetrated her.
>>17208657
They are not on their own. People who hurt themselves have my support. If someone practices self-harm and ask me for help, I am personally inclined to help. If such people harm themselves through others, I cannot say that a crime is taking place. I cannot say whether the harm that come to them is intentional or unintentional unless I am present on the scene.
You could have avoided all of this by just giving him a handy.
Or you know, a boyfriend who respects you.
>>17208691
I want to communicate that she did not say "I wish to cease all sexual activities". She said "I wish to cease penetration". That is two different statements. I think she should have said "I wish to cease all sexual activities" before being worn down. How can I say this without offending you, what words should I use? I will listen to suggestions. I only wish to communicate properly.
>>17208704
>She could have avoided this by giving him a handy or a boyfriend
I agree. She should have found a cute faggot for her boyfriend.
So why didn't you break up?
>>17208685
>its just not worth it!
if you do not feel that it is worth your time to prosecute a person that raped you, then you were not raped.
>>17208716
>I want to communicate that she did not say "I wish to cease all sexual activities". She said "I wish to cease penetration". That is two different statements.
Yeah. And he went against the latter anyway.
>I think she should have said "I wish to cease all sexual activities" before being worn down.
I think he should have stopped when she said no the first dozen times.
>How can I say this without offending you, what words should I use?
You can't. Your premise is bullshit. She communicated fine. He ignored blatant 'no's.
There's any number of things she could have done for different results, but they don't matter. She said no and he didn't stop. Even if she'd hopped out of bed and gone to a hotel the first time he ignored her, he's the one who ignored a blatant no.
There is no communication issue here. She said no, he understood her, and he continued anyway. Repeatedly.
>>17208727
>if you weren't caught speeding, you weren't speeding
>>17208727
That's not a rule. That's not a real thing. I don't get why assholes like you think they get to tell people what they went through, and how they should feel about it and the action they should take. You are a monumental ass.
This is definitely rape. You said no specifically.
OP, I was in your shoes when I was 13. I don't know how old you are or how long you've dated this guy, but he's crossing some serious boundaries and will do worse things to you in the future.
>First boyfriend, he's my age
> I don't know shit about sex
>It starts with him groping and fingering me in public at school, even when I tell him "no" repeatedly
>He manipulates me into spending all my free time after school with him or on the phone with him
>Fucks up my friendships, kills what self esteem I had with underhanded insults
>I'm naive, convinced this is just how relationships are
>He makes me give him head, makes me gag on purpose. Films it.
>Fucks me in the ass. Blames the pain and bleeding on me being uptight. Tells me it'll get better (it doesn't.)
>Cheats on me openly once he thinks he's broken my will enough. I'm furious but I let him, still don't know any better.
>Tries to convince me to fuck his friends, molest his little brother, other things that are fucking horrible
Two years of that, and it started with little signs like yours. It's a slippery slope. He doesn't care about you or respect you, you are there for his enjoyment.
>>17208731
She never said no to ending the sexual activity. She said no to penetration. I should be able to say this because it's the truth. The OP herself makes it very clear that she does not mind if he uses her body for sex. She said yes to this. She said no to penetration. If you claim that this premise is bullshit then you are not only disrespecting me but you are also disrespecting the OP. For what purpose do you wish to do this? So you can justify being angry at a situation that you wish to read however you want?
>>17208065
If you don't feel like it was rape, it wasn't. People just try to come up with catch-all definitions of rape to account for people being intimidated, coerced etc. etc. but honestly if you let him do it it wasn't rape. It'd be like calling it theft if he took food from your fridge in front of you and you didn't say anything.
>>17208785
>She said no to penetration.
WHICH. HE. DID. ANYWAY.
If he hadn't penetrated her and just used her body in a way she was okay with there'd be no issue. I don't even know what you're fucking trying to say at this point.
She said no to penetration. He penetrated her anyway. End of story.
>>17208791
It'd be like if you told someone repeatedly that they were under no circumstances to take food from your fridge several times, telling them that they do not and will not have permission to do that, and they do it anyway as soon as you stop yelling at them.
>>17208791
If you say NO, DONT TAKE MY FUCKING FOOD then yeah, it is stealing. He not obligated to tackle someone who takes your leftover sandwich just for it to be stealing. OP said no, bf did it anyway. That's the literal definition of rape. She doesn't need to be traumatized for it to be rape, she doesn't need to physically fight him off. He knew she didn't want it, he did it anyway.
I don't think this guy is going to be out on t he streets violently raping strangers, but he is the kind of person who uses people and gives no shits for their feelings.
>>17208785
SHUT UP ALREADY
>>17208797
>I don't even know what you're fucking trying to say at this point.
Then I will do your work for you.
In post >> 17208628 I wrote
>she should have put a stop to the activity before being worn down
You answered in post >>17208585
>She did. She said very blatantly "no". End of story.
This shows that you did not understand the situation correctly. I explained again that OP said no to penetration but didn't say to end the entire sexual activity. It is possible to communicate one thing but not the other. That is what happened. That is what the OP deliberately describes. If you read something different then you read incorrectly. I am not saying something outlandish, I am repeating what the OP said with clarification. I think it would have been good if she asked for the sexual activity to stop before she became pissed off. How can I say this without offending you?
>>17208785
>For what purpose do you wish to do this? So you can justify being angry at a situation that you wish to read however you want?
Nailed it. Lol you have the patience of a saint my friend. What you're doing really is admirable. All some people know how to do nowadays is get offended by stuff that goes against the script, because they've been taught what to think rather than how to think. Personally I still maintain that OP wasn't at fault here because what she did do should've been enough for her bf to quit being a cunt and respect her wishes, but the point you're pushing is valid nonetheless. It's pretty damned sad that it's currently more acceptable to teach us we can and should cry rape even over shit that is categorically not rape than it is to teach us it's ok and doesn't make us a bitch or a bad girlfriend or whatever else to just be a little more assertive and stand the fuck up for ourselves so as to more often avoid and prevent the possibility of rape/"rape" occurring in the first place.
>>17208839
>ut didn't say to end the entire sexual activity
Because that's not what needed to be ended.
What needed to end was the penetration. Which she clearly communicated. Which he ignored. That is the issue.
If he had stopped attempting to penetrate her and just gotten off by other means she was agreeable to, this thread wouldn't exist. The issue was not sexual activity, the issue was penetration.
>I think it would have been good if she asked for the sexual activity to stop before she became pissed off.
Then you're an idiot. Sexual activity is not the issue. The issue is that she said no penetration and he penetrated her anyway. I don't understand why this is so hard to grasp.
She communicated her wishes very clearly, and he ignored her. It's not her fault that he ignored her. She doesn't have to shift the goal posts to try and trick him into respecting her wishes.
She said no to penetration and he penetrated her. I don't know how how many times I have to say it for you to understand. You wouldn't happen to be OP's dipshit boyfriend, would you?
>How can I say this without offending you?
As I said, you can't, because your premise is complete and utter nonsense.
It's technically rape.
It's like you telling him "no don't use my car" then he uses it. It's still car theft but you don't have the emotional sentiment of being carjacked.
If you don't have the emotional sentiment of being raped, don't try to. Next time he does something like that hit his throat with the side of your hand though.
>>17208855
Do you feed yourself and pay all your own bills and stuff?
If you're not upset about it, don't try to be. Don't get so hung up on what other people think you should feel. If you don't feel it was rape, then it wasn't.
>>17208065
my ex did something very similar to me and i didnt think of it as rape until he held me down and had sex with me when i didnt want him to a few weeks later. This also happened one more time. I consider all instances rape now and have PTSD from it. The fact is that he does not care for your well being because you said no multiple times and he had sex with you anyways and kept pressuring you. It is called coercive rape. Get out while you can, I know it hard to leave though.
OP please tell me you dumped this asshole already.
You didn't say no at the end, did you? Your silence was consent in this case.
If you don't feel raped, you aren't raped. I've technically been raped twice and yet for some reason I don't feel the need to play the victim card, because fuck it, it's not actually that important. Someone wanted to fuck me and I didn't really feel like it but I let it happen because whatever. That shit ain't rape.
>>17210375
Jesus christ you are stupid. Rape has an objective definition that doesn't give two shits about your feelings. The VERY FIRST reply to this thread says rape doesn't need to be a traumatic experience to be rape. It doesn't absolutely have to be the biggest god damned deal in the world, but at the end of the day fucking someone with their affirmative consent is rape. Good for you for not being bothered by being raped, you were still raped.
>>17208267
Girls are taught their entire lives that only frigid bitches and uppity cunts say no and stand up for themselves.
>>17208065
Yep, that's rape. You told him several times to stop and he ignored it. He even came inside of you, could have gotten you pregnant under certain circumstances.
You don't have to call the cops on him if you don't feel any emotional trauma and aren't hurt in any other way, that's your choice. Rape is considered such a horrible crime because it fucks up the victims pretty badly for many years with PTSD and other mental problems. Which doesn't appear to be relevant here. Though a judge would give him some years in prison for this.
The thing you definitely need to do is break up with him, that guy is a bastard.
Whether it's rape or not, he clearly doesn't respect you or your body.
>>17208262
You're creating a fallacy by using a completely different situation as an example. Not wanting to tear up a family already tainted with drug addiction even though you really are piseed that your car is stolen is not the same as "not giving a fuck if my dude wants to borrow the tv yo"
