fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #1464 ]

[ SECRET POST #1464 ]

⌈ Secret Post #1464 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12. [repeat]

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

__________________________________________________

19.

__________________________________________________

20.

__________________________________________________

21.

__________________________________________________

22.

__________________________________________________

23.

__________________________________________________

24.

__________________________________________________

25.

__________________________________________________

26.

__________________________________________________

27.

__________________________________________________

28.

__________________________________________________

29.

__________________________________________________

30.

__________________________________________________

31.

__________________________________________________

32.

__________________________________________________

33.

__________________________________________________

34.

__________________________________________________

35.

__________________________________________________

36.

__________________________________________________

37.

__________________________________________________

38.

__________________________________________________

39.

__________________________________________________

40.

__________________________________________________

41.

__________________________________________________

42.

__________________________________________________

43.

__________________________________________________

44.

__________________________________________________

45.

__________________________________________________

46.

__________________________________________________

47.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 108 secrets from Secret Submission Post #209.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

No, I'm saying that if non-consent isn't stated, some actions can be perceived as a desire to have sex...

Yeah but regardless of your crazy-ass perceptions you don't have the right to assume that, ever. He would be 100% rapist in that case. Like if you acting like your kitchen sucks, I can't bust in while you are sleeping and tear down your kitchen. It's property damage no matter what, and you could press charges.

Yet so many people think its ok to do that with a womans body, because its public property until otherwise stated. Thats whats the stupidest thing.

Okay.

Assume you are in bed with a man.

You quite enthusiastically remove your clothes, and his.

You stroke him in places that are clearly sexual.

Lots of kissing and petting ensues.

Sex ensues, but you don't like that.

My question is: how was that man , in all reasonable terms, supposed to know you didn't want it...unless you in some way stated so at the time?

Sex is often a flow of things...and in realistic situations, I've never known anyone to specifically ask permission for every step (can I take off your bra? - Can I kiss your thigh?) , unless it was like the first time you were doing something specific...

He's supposed to know I don't want it by asking me about having sex. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Assume you are in a kitchen with a man.
You open up the fridge.
Serve him a nice piece of turkey.
You all get to eat and have nice dinnertime.
But then he eats your cake, that you were saving for your kids b-day.

The key is...ask first. Somehow we understand that with everything EXCEPT woman's body. "Oh why should I have to ask for permission? No one else asks for permission!"

Its bs. It doesn't belong to you, it doesn't belong to him. Get over it. Regardless if she ever said "no" (hard to do when you are sleeping), she never gave him permission to do that sort of thing, so the "no" would be a moot point (only noteworthy if she gave him permission earlier).

Ehm, and do you assume that that is actually vocally stated every time between all couples? Seriously?

And as for the kitchen...tough shit on the cake, unless you specifically told him not to eat is, or stay out of the fridge...

And as for the kitchen...tough shit on the cake, unless you specifically told him not to eat is, or stay out of the fridge...

Wow. Either you don't understand how analogies work, or you just demonstrated a terrifying view on consent and bodily autonomy. "Tough shit"? Tough shit if you get raped?

Or maybe it's a shitty analogy to start with...

Let someone into your fridge, and they will most likely eat your food...

Actually, even with my best friend of five years, whose house I practically live at from time to time, I still ask permission to eat anything in her fridge. That's ignoring the fact that if you offer them one thing, that doesn't mean they are free to take anything they want within your sexual fridge without asking first. If I offer someone a turkey and only a turkey, they'd better ask before taking the cake, too.

Your situation, being in an established relationship, is not the same as a casual or infrequent sex partner. Beyond that, if a hypothetical partner of mine suddenly seemed bored or uncomfortable, yes, I would ask if they were okay and wanted to continue, even if they were a long-term partner, because it's considerate and polite. I would hope anyone would react to a very obvious physical disinterest or dislike with concern and inquiry, instead of simply ignoring it because consent had been given at a previous time.

You're right about sex being non-vocal: I am extremely quiet during intimacy, and I express consent and non-consent through body language most of the time. If something hurts me, I don't go "Get off me, you fuck," I struggle and push my partner away, only speaking when absolutely pushed to do so. That is a sign of unwillingness and should cause hir to ask if something is wrong. When someone punches you for doing something, just because they didn't say "I don't like that" doesn't mean that it's not apparent that the partner doesn't like what is being done.

If I'm reading your opinion correctly, nonverbal consent is legitimate, but nonverbal lack of consent is not. That's kind of faulty. It is very easy to express non-consent through body language instead of words. In my case, I found it incredibly difficult to speak at all during intimacy. Not quite sure why. That doesn't invalidate my ways of showing that I wanted my partner to stop doing what he was doing.

It doesn't matter if someone says "no," or doesn't. If they repeatedly flinch away from you and are noticeably uncomfortable, then someone should ask if something is okay before continuing, and if they continue to do something that clearly is meriting a negative response, then they are acting without consent. I don't care if a woman doesn't say no. If she clamps her legs together when you put your hand between her legs, she is not consenting to your touching, and continuing to force your hand between her legs is sexual assault. One thing to consider is shock: Some people scream when they are surprised, some people are too startled to coherently say anything, and some completely shut down. Not being able to protest does not invalidate a situation being rape; if they are the type to shut down, they might very well have no idea how to deal with the situation and instead just stop resisting.

I've had very personal experiences involving situations where consent was dubious due to the nature of the situation. My ex was a very manipulative person who had a penchant for mindfucking people into giving dubious consent. He backed that with a stunning record of serial rape and child molestation, so.

Obviously, all of this isn't responding to this one comment, but the stance you've taken throughout this thread. Terribly sorry for the massive tl;dr, but I think you aren't quite interpreting the situation correctly, and some of the opinions you've expressed are, frankly, kind of dangerous.

No, *sigh*

Nonverbal non-consent is not illegitimate, it's just much harder to read. Pushing away would be very clear. So would flinching be. But a slightly absent look in their eyes, or simply silence (unless that is very atypical of them), or even less-enthusiasm-than usual might very well be signs of displeasure...or they might be signs of tiredness, having other things on their mind, etc.

I can think of occasions where I had sex in exactly those circumstances..and where I chose to have sex despite those circumstances. And yes, often my partner picks up on that...sometimes he doesn't.

So what we're talking about here: is that action that you have taken, within the context of that relationship, reasonably clear to be seen as non-consent? And if a partner is not capable of reading those signs correctly, without any malice intended, is it then still reasonable to accuse them of a crime as heinous as rape?

I do not see manipulation quite the same as rape. I also had an ex who was rather manipulative and frankly, a pathological,unfaithful liar.
The situation was a bit reversed, as from what I could make out, there had been some abuse inflicted on him at some point (but it's very hard to get to the actual truth even there)
Looking back, if having all the info, I might not have gotten involved with him.
But still,anything sexual that went on between us, was consensual considering the info I had at that time.
Finding out that he lied to me about some things, does not make it rape retro-actively, no matter how bad the deceit might have been.

And I do fear this thread has indeed gotten massively out of hand. And after a while I did just reply in short, simplified, answers that are in fact too simplified for the matter at hand.

You seem REALLY invested in a pretty fucked up worldview, to the point where you seriously sound like you can't admit that something that happened to you was rape and therefore insist that it objectively is not rape... to the point where you are making excuses for rapists, and excusing behaviour that to most people IS rape.

No, I think your world view is pretty fucked up.

I think trying to talk women into believing they were raped when they weren't, is pretty fucked up. And it's exactly how I can see false accusations being formed.

I liked all the sex I had in my life.

I had all of it voluntarily.

And I accept any possible screw-ups as my own.

Sex is just sex. I mean, it's great, but it's not some sort of magical, mystical experience bonding two souls that has to be perfect in every circumstance.

I do not describe to your ridiculous notions of rape, which is pretty much anything except for a woman asking "can we have sex now, please?" and having a ten-minute conversation about how they really feel prior. Which really is NOT the way I like my sex.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2011-01-06 09:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2011-01-06 13:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

kallanda-lee.livejournal.com - 2011-01-06 16:30 (UTC) - Expand

"to most people"

I think you are being overflattering.

I never said it was "vocally stated" all the time between all couples. Not once did I ever say that.

All I said was that her body is her own, and unless she gives her permission you don't have a right to it. Nor does anyone else, for that matter, besides for herself. Sorry. Might want to do something about your entitlement complex towards others. And also your entitlement complex toward cake.

But I want to have my cake and it it :(

But seriously.

You're missing the point.

Never did I say her body wasn't hers.

I'm saying that in some cases, where there has been previous consent, it's not unreasonable to believe said consent still exists..unless stated otherwise.

Men (or women for that matter) are not mind readers.
If something has been okay the first 200 times, but it's not okay the 201st time, you might you know, want to tell them...

In a lot of relationships, certain types of consent are implied, because that is what the people involved have been doing for years.
Not just sexually, but for example, let's say the consent to visit your partner's house while he's not there.

If he has given you the key, and you've been there without him for 50 times, and suddenly it's not okay anymore, this is confusing, and should be stated clearly (that it's not okay anymore and why it's not okay anymore)

Clearly, this is not the case in the specific Assange accusation.

A woman's body is not a house, a piece of food, something to be used by a man, and these comparisons you're making are offensive and dehumanizing as fuck so stop doing it and stop bringing up completely irrelevant examples

The examples are entirely relevant.

it's alright to make mistakes. we all do. the mark of a truly intelligent person is that they can recognize they've made one, and change their views or actions accordingly.

you are trying to defend a man who has been accused of rape and in doing so are doing something called rape apologism. it's not your job to defend him or absolve him of guilt, it's your job to recognize that accusing someone of rape is a very serious thing to do and very often is not unfounded. once you have recognized this, you don't need to start trumpeting that assange is a rapist; you can simply realize that by stating that the woman is a liar or misguided you are being incredibly hurtful to all rape survivors out there, and trying to defend an inexcusable crime.

so please step down from this. no one will think the less of you; in fact, they'll probably think the more.

thank you,

anon

See, I'm sort of the hard evidence kind of girl.

I'm not saying Assange might not be a rapist.

I'm saying that I find both the timing as the description of events in this particular case fishy.

In any case, I would not call anyone a rapist unless proven guilty or unless I witnessed it myself.
Nor would I call anyone a murderer unless it was proven he was, or I knew for a fact he was, because of the graveness of these types of allegations

The crime -if true- is indeed inexcusable. But it has to be established that a crime was indeed committed.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2011-01-06 14:06 (UTC) - Expand

Uhhhhhhhhhhhh...fuck you, you piece of shit. Stop dehumnizing women by comparing them to inanimate objects.

If men and women aren't mind-readers, they can fucking ask for permission. Boom! Problem fucking solve. I don't care if I women was running buck-naked down mainstree usa, that does not give a man permission to have sex with her. I don't care what "actions" were leading up to it.

Right, even if such actions included say things like, wrapping her hand around his cock?

Still doesn't mean consent.

Yup, I can see where we'd disagree...

You are comparing women to food, an inanimate object intended solely for the consumption of men.

How do you not realize this is misogynist as fuck

Someone else compared them to food, actually...
Turkey, I believe.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only