When is it rape?

According to this article in Time Magazine, the law in Maryland or North Carolina regarding rape is "when a woman says yes, she can't take it back once sex has begun--or, at least, she can't call the act rape."

"If the law doesn't recognize a woman's right to say no during sex, they say, there is no recourse for a woman who begins to feel pain or who learns her partner isn't wearing a condom or has HIV."

This scares me.  I am lucky-I have never been raped.  One in every six American women will experience sexual assault, and a rape occurs every two and a half minutes, according to RAINN.  In college I heard plenty of stories from my classmates about negative sexual experiences, many of which I'd have called date rape.  Most went unreported.  If the law isn't even on your side, how much less likely are you to report a rape?

This law is attempting to draw a legal line between a victim and a cock tease (although they wouldn't call it that).  The true victim of a rape is the girl who said no all along.  A cock tease who said yes, and then has the audacity to change her mind-well, she just got what she deserved.

I'm not going to go so far as to say that a woman has the right to do whatever she wants and expect no consequences whatsoever.  If I dress in a short tight skirt and high heels I know I'm sending out a signal that I want attention of a sexual nature.  HOWEVER, this does not mean I am obligated to fuck any guy who buys me a drink, dances with me, kisses me, or even gets a blow job from me.

Like most women, there are times when I have been engaged in foreplay and consented to sex and for some reason, I lose the mood.  Once or twice it was because a ragged nail scratched my clit.  On occasion, my head just falls out of the game and I start thinking about the laundry or my to do list or the new episode of Ugly Betty.  It's rarely the fault of my partner, although on more than one occasion it has been.  The point is that I've lost interest in sex mid foreplay, and I've asked my partner to stop. 

I can only think of one occasion when my partner wasn't empathetic to me.  I was accused of being a tease and the guy put on his pants, left, and never called me again.  Not that I was interested in repeating my experience with him.

What makes me annoyed is the same phenomenon I discussed in this entry, where I rant about sexual stereotypes-specifically the ones that paint men as sex-crazed animals and women as receptacles of that lust.  On some level, these laws seem to think that there is a point where men can't stop (and in fact a man is quoted as saying something along those lines in the article) and that they shouldn't be penalized for that.  This only furthers stereotypes about sexual desire and physical need.  Perhaps the men in these cases will start calling it the "blue-balls defense?"

At the end of the day, if a woman changes her mind, she deserves to have her partner stop.  Her partner can be annoyed about it.  But seriously, grow up and go masturbate. 

What about the circumstances described in the italicized quote-pain, refusal to wear a condom, HIV?  Those are situations where a woman should be applauded for saying no.

Everyone should feel safe to say it, and it should have impact.  If states like Maryland and North Carolina take that away, then who's to say where it ends?  Will we too one day have a case  like the one in Italy where a Supreme Court Justice will say "it wasn't rape...her jeans were too tight for another person to take off without help?"

No means no, no matter when you say it.

Comments

[Gorgeousmoments]

I very much agree that I woman has the right to say no at any stage. Legally though, things can get pretty difficult. A yes followed by a no at some point as understood by the woman could land a guy in jail for many years. Should one be sesitive enough to back out if their partner changers their mind or isn't in the mood. Of course. But it would be a very big weapon to be able to put someone away by just saying I happened to change my mind at some stage. This issue would be one that would require some thought.

[Sabrina Morgan]

Great post, and thank you for calling attention to this legal issue. Without the right to withdraw consent, the idea and the actuality of consent are weakened. It seems like especially in cases of date rape, when a woman - or anyone - fears a no won't be respected, they'll say yes just to get some measure of perceived control.

[Mandy Muse]

Wow - that's really challenging legally. It's true, there are many reasons to stop mid-stream, and I guess maybe the way to look at it is to substitute "backrub" for "sex." "He started giving me a backrub but I didn't like his hands so I told him to stop and he wouldn't stop touching me." Totally logical and understandable. And while there's a lot to be said for being swept away by passion, it's not passion that keeps a guy going when a girl says "stop."

[mrszigzagman]

I saw this on Sugasm and had to stop by and read it. I agree no is no whenever a woman says it. Once we consent it can be revoked. While uncomfortable for the man mid stride, a mature man would be more concerned about his partner's well being and why she changed her mind. You want a unfeeling receptical buy a blow up doll. I will admit I have had a man stop mid sex. It was very disturbing physically and emotionally for me, but in the end respect for another human overrides any personal distress. I find this law very disturbing.

[John]

I agree, if one party says no it should mean no.

However, it's worth remembering that sex (and therefore) rape is an interaction between two people. And like any person to person contact, while there may be lots of black and white plain for all to see, there is also acres of grey.

I wrote a short article a few months ago entitled Rape on trial. It hopefully illustrates just how murky it can be.

[Oscar the Observer]

Ironically, if a man lost the mood for sex and pull away, a woman can not tease him for being clit tease because society expect women to bow to men's needs! Interesting post :).

[Jerry Bathers]

I believe this law exist to encourage women to think very carefully before engaging in sexual congress and that stopping in the act of mid congress for transient reasons (wondering about new Ugly Betty Episodes) can have serious consequences. Acrossing a highway or not is okay, but stopping in the middle is dangerous and such behavior creates room for motives such as black mail, malice and spite. Also our legal system is based on burden of proof, not just, he said she of when and where the alleged "no" was said, how loud. Rape is a serious charge, which just a charge can destroy a person's career, social standing and life, even if never convicted. Other states law often err in the other direction, an example is Arizona state law, which says if either party has consumed alcohol they can not consent to sexual intercourse, thus it can be considered rape. Btw, the statistics RAINN sites are based on Dr Mary Koss's study, where the Arizona law was used as a standard, also standards included rape as, if partner really didn't feel like but decided to anyway or if the partner was touched and asked the other person to quit. In short, 43% of the women Koss determined to "raped" disagreed. FBI crime statistics set it at about 2%, not to say rape isn't a serious crime, but we are trying to clarify the facts, right?