As a male, I know that I must ask three times before I take "no" for an answer from a woman. If this were not the case I would not be married to the woman I am.

I was a loser in the past when I took the first "no" as what a woman wanted.

I would like to have a civil discussion about rape. I agree, the concept is vile. How do we define the line between consentual and forced?

Sincerely... can we use some anecdotal examples?

i've learned that KR is not the place to expose things about yourself that might make you vulnerable. so i'm not going to share any 'anecdotal examples'
because some cunt will think he can use it to make some not funny but really hurtful joke.

i will say that rape is vile and all destroying. and there are women who accuse men of rape when they haven't been raped, and that say no when they mean yes etc. this is horrible, and so irresponsible. it makes it harder for a woman to be believed if she says she has been raped. and she is demonised and vilified for reporting it, instead of being helped. and the whole problem gets worse.

basically if someone says no once then you should take it as a no. she'll learn soon enough that she can't say no when she means yes. so you don't get sex, OH NOES. you'll survive.

__________________
you'll go to hell for what your dirty mind is thinking

wasn't one no enough?
hmm, did you ever think that perhaps you were intimdating/hassling/pressuring these women into doing you what you want?

I would agree that others will trash you personally, but that says more about them than you. I have grown dramatically from exposing my vulnerable side. Thank goodness I have one.

I would find absolutely no pleasure in the sexual violence against a woman. I have the fortune of loving myself enough that what comes out of my mouth is love... and what comes out of my desire is the well-being of others. At KR I witness a lot of "verbal rape". This is what seems to be in the unconscious mind of many who post here.

Is rape not the manifestation of the inner shadow? And maybe psychically a woman is asking to be treated rough.... and a man goes too far in reading the unconscious desires and passions that underlie a woman's sexuality, and the vibes they send off?

I "asked" in a consentual manner; never pushed too hard. I never have assumed a woman meant "yes" when she said "no". I just learned that I was failing by taking the first "no" as the final answer.

I appreciate this openness. maybe other men will learn better to communicate by this discussion.

Do you mean you didn't take no as first answer when just persuing her in general or do you mean you had her in your bedroom and kept waiting for the words yes to come out so you could have sex with her?

There may not be much of a difference to men but there is a difference to women.

if i don't get a "hell yes" first time then fuck it. enthusiasm is everything.

seriously though who asks, except euphemistically? whether you and the person you're with want to fuck is usually made pretty clear non-verbally. "no"s happen when people are dumb enough to misread things and then one should be enough.

I have always been a conscientious man (the decent guy). I have an intuition that has served me well, so I have never had a woman in my bedroom that I had to ask to have sex with more than a look.

I ask you, though.... why would a woman be in a man's bedroom if she wasn't subtly saying "maybe"? Measuring for curtains?

Enthusiasm is my viagra.

no they're very different situations to me. if paladin means pursuing this thread isn't really about rape it's about stalking/wooing and paladin is confusing things for his own silly reasons again

Sorry, I have confused the issue. I have never gone past one "no" involving an answer about sex. One "no" works for me there.

Thanks for calling attention to my mistake.

In the case of other men who may read "no" as meaning "yes" for sex..... i really do have some confusion. Do some men read a "look" to mean a "yes". Therefore, just because a woman looks sexy to them... how do they misinterpret that a woman "wants it"?

Of course you mean attitude in a clear and sober state of mind, right? Or is getting her drunk - even if you know its still 'no' - good enough?

Hypothetically, of course.

no

__________________
you'll go to hell for what your dirty mind is thinking

"attitude"?

consent while drunk is a thorny one, and it's legality was being debated recently in the uk. clearly the very drunk cannot give consent, just as an unconscious person can't. but if you take away the responsibility for giving or denying consent from someone because they are drunk you still can't take away the responsibility for them choosing to get drunk in the first place (excepting spiking drinks, which is the only definition of "getting her drunk" i can really accept. we choose what we drink), however that doesn't make the victim responsible for things that then happen to them without their consent. what it may do is make them responsible for giving lets call it a false consent, but as that isn't an actual consent a rape may still have taken place.

so who knows?

i never have sex with guys who are really drunk, i don't find it attractive.
why would anyone want to have sex with someone who needs to be drunk first?
i dunno... is this even relevant?

__________________
you'll go to hell for what your dirty mind is thinking

There've been two occasions when I think I actually crossed a line, when I felt in retrospect that I'd been more pushy than I could justify. Alcohol was involved, and I felt terrible after. It never resulted in actual sex or anything, because I'm far too pussy, but the intent was there and that's bad enough.

On the thorny issue of consent, when it's justified or whatever, obviously you should never have sex with someone who doesn't want to. But people shouldn't push it with the whole "woman's perogative" thing either. As far as I'm concerned, being able to change one's mind - or, to be more blunt, to welch on a verbal contract - is a privelege, not a God/ovary-given right.

please clarify this? i'm not sure i understand what you're saying clearly

__________________
you'll go to hell for what your dirty mind is thinking

There was this whole letigious thing recently that was basically about when a woman can withdraw consent, apparently legally if a woman decides that "no means no" more than about a second before the guy cums, it could be classed as rape. I don't know, I'd hope that everyone here thinks that's completely retarded, wide open for abuse and just adding needless confusion to the issue by making it easier to bring allegations but no easier to prosecute.

Rant partly over. Basically I think the responsibility is on both parties to establish whether they should be having sex, not just the guy. People should be able to change their mind if they decide they don't want to do anything after all, but I would hope that people were responsible enough to avoid the situation wherever possible.

Gay guys don't generally have this kind of problem. I think maybe it's a guy thing, but we'd be much more inclined to just put up with it, chalk it down to experience or whatever.

yeah, basically i understood that to mean that i can change my mind during sex, and the guy should stop. anything after that point is rape

__________________
you'll go to hell for what your dirty mind is thinking