This specific explanation in it's current form is not considered rape(though there isn't sufficient information to determine that wholly). After two consenting adults begin any sexual act there is at that time a determined social contract. Similar to common-law ideals such as common-law marriage and so forth there are certain things that pertain to those social contracts that are enforceable by the law or not. If there were an assertion of guilt upon all non-agreed sexual acts then even changing positions would technically be rape if either partner didn't like them.
That being stated the fact that she said no and pushed him away raises two questions:
1. Did she specifically state before hand that there was to be no vaginal intercourse?
2. Did he attempt to continue after she had said no?
Those two factors are what would determine if it's a potential sexual assault, not just the fact that it happened. If she said before they began having sex that vaginal intercourse was not agreed upon then yes, he would have committed an act of sexual assault(Rape by it's legal definition). The same is true if he was told no and attempted to continue. To go as far as to try him directly for rape is the question, generally all cases of sexual assault that result in penetration are subject to Rape charges but that is ultimately up to a court decision as to if it is full blown felony rape or sexual assault or a case of mistaken consent. The responses to those two raised questions and the overall judgement towards the implied consent of sexual acts with a known partner are all usually considered in a final verdict.
EDIT: I feel like I should include the baseline that this doesn't grant individuals of past sexual encounters or even current encounters to do something entirely without consent. Like ripping off a condom and blasting someone in the face or vaginally or whatever is NOT ok just because they didn't have time to say no. Things of that nature are implied when protected sex is agreed upon at time of consent. The same goes for physical assaults such as slapping, choking, etc even though they are common erotic elements in consensual sex they aren't automatically included in general verbal consent...If that makes sense?
She did not state that she didn't want vaginal before hand. She claims it "was implied" however it was never specifically stated. And I know he did not try to continue after being shoved off, that they both agree on I think. This is all from my friend tho so it may be biased however he is telling me what she says so her side is still known.
Is this rape, sexual assault or neither?
← View full post
I mean, in legal ways this can be considered rape.
--
Maid_in_Pink
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
This specific explanation in it's current form is not considered rape(though there isn't sufficient information to determine that wholly). After two consenting adults begin any sexual act there is at that time a determined social contract. Similar to common-law ideals such as common-law marriage and so forth there are certain things that pertain to those social contracts that are enforceable by the law or not. If there were an assertion of guilt upon all non-agreed sexual acts then even changing positions would technically be rape if either partner didn't like them.
That being stated the fact that she said no and pushed him away raises two questions:
1. Did she specifically state before hand that there was to be no vaginal intercourse?
2. Did he attempt to continue after she had said no?
Those two factors are what would determine if it's a potential sexual assault, not just the fact that it happened. If she said before they began having sex that vaginal intercourse was not agreed upon then yes, he would have committed an act of sexual assault(Rape by it's legal definition). The same is true if he was told no and attempted to continue. To go as far as to try him directly for rape is the question, generally all cases of sexual assault that result in penetration are subject to Rape charges but that is ultimately up to a court decision as to if it is full blown felony rape or sexual assault or a case of mistaken consent. The responses to those two raised questions and the overall judgement towards the implied consent of sexual acts with a known partner are all usually considered in a final verdict.
EDIT: I feel like I should include the baseline that this doesn't grant individuals of past sexual encounters or even current encounters to do something entirely without consent. Like ripping off a condom and blasting someone in the face or vaginally or whatever is NOT ok just because they didn't have time to say no. Things of that nature are implied when protected sex is agreed upon at time of consent. The same goes for physical assaults such as slapping, choking, etc even though they are common erotic elements in consensual sex they aren't automatically included in general verbal consent...If that makes sense?
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
She did not state that she didn't want vaginal before hand. She claims it "was implied" however it was never specifically stated. And I know he did not try to continue after being shoved off, that they both agree on I think. This is all from my friend tho so it may be biased however he is telling me what she says so her side is still known.
Can or is? Was I not specific enough in describing the scenario?