25 years old and deep in debt

[Ideologue]

I am never going to allow myself to be alone with a woman ever again. There has to be a witness to my innocence. Also, I am going to require my wife to sign a release form every night before entering the bedroom.

No shit.  Going by some definitions I probably "sexually assault" my wife almost every night-- sometimes involuntarily and/or while I'm asleep!

That is a bit of a theoretical problem.  The way Canadian law is, you can not consent to sexual activity if you're unconscious, and if you lose consciousness any prior consent is vitiated.  So, if you're significant other is asleep it is technically against the law to initiate any kind of sex act.

That being said - have you ever heard of anyone being charged with sex assault in that kind of scenario?  Of course not.  The system has common sense.

A good summary, albeit of the dumbest decision of a highest court I'd ever read.

Here's a fun fact pattern; applying R. v. J.A., have I committed any crime if I kiss my girlfriend goodnight while she's unconscious next to me?  (The answer is yes.)

Another one: every time my girlfriend sleeps over, I wind up groping her while she is unconscious.  However, I am also unconscious when these incidents occur.  Crime?  (I expect yes.  She cannot consent even though as a practical matter she obviously doesn't mind--at least terribly--but given the Canadian Supreme Court's guidance to its subordinate courts to judicially review the most minute aspect of its citizens' sex lives and refuse to treat women as humans who have the right to set the limits of their own sexuality and sexual availability, you could probably get an appeals court to infer intent to assault by my own pattern of agreeing to sleep next to her, and I'd be in jail for ten years like poor J.A.)

[Razgovory]

Well I do not see how that is possible.  What might be too far for one person might not be for another.  Which is why I think it is perfectly fine so long as somebody stops what they are doing when the other person says something. 

I guess the alternative is we have very strict codes of etiquette where everything is very strictly controlled via social convention.  But we already did that and we rebelled remember?  Besides I don't know if that actually reduces rape.  But it probably reduces somebody getting a bit too frisky on a date.

This why education of both boys and girls is essential. Girls need to learn that "no" is a safeword, not a ploy to appear coy. And boys need to learn that when they hear that, they need to back off and figure out what's really going on. Even if she still pushes forward, the smart boy stops the whole thing and walks away to have a rational, clear conversation before continuing anything. The smart girl doesn't play around when she uses the word "no". She says it loudly, clearly, and definitively. No equivocation.

It all comes down to clear, concise communication on both sides. We need to teach kids this in Sex Ed starting in 6th grade and reiterate it all the way through school.

That is all great and desireable, but I cannot accept that the definition or "rape" is essentially "sex where ideally clear and concise communication has not occurred".

It kept that wikilinks guy holed up in an Ecuadorian Embassy for several months, so it's not like it's all bad.

[Barrister]

Yes.  Without any doubt.  Sexual assault is a sex act without consent.  Sarah did not consent.

Do you have to get a verbal "yes" before you proceed? 

If you've gotten a verbal "no", then absolutely you'd better get a verbal "yes" before proceeding.

Look - there are some grey areas here.  If you're told "well I have a headache", or "I'm feeling tired", then while it would still be without consent, you may have an 'honest but mistaken belief in consent'.

But as they say, "no means no".

Forever and ever?

No means no until the other person says yes.

[Tonitrus]

Old movies have taught me that women simply need to be kissed forcefully, perhaps initially against their wishes, but then consent can be judged when they either;

a. willingly consent romantically into your arms.
b. slap you hard and strut off indignantly.

Or, if you're John Wayne, you will chase her all around the town, paddle her fanny with a coal shovel, and then live happily ever after.

[Neil]

Interestingly, when I brought your story up with my 18-year-old son, he said that the first time she said no, he'd back off. I asked what that meant, and he said that if she said no, he'd take it back to just making out. End of story. He wouldn't ever want to put a girl into the position of feeling like he pressured her into anything.

Was this the gay one?

[Ed Anger]

Or, if you're John Wayne, you will chase her all around the town, paddle her fanny with a coal shovel, and then live happily ever after.

That was how I got my wife. Except it was in 5th grade and it was a paddle.

[Caliga]

I liked the part in The Fountainhead where Roark raped that chick and she loved it.

Ayn Rand: the woman who knew nothing about women.

[Eddie Teach]

I liked the part in The Fountainhead where Roark raped that chick and she loved it.

Ayn Rand: the woman who knew nothing about women.

I don't think Dominique Francon was supposed to be some kind of "everywoman" character.

[merithyn]

Interestingly, when I brought your story up with my 18-year-old son, he said that the first time she said no, he'd back off. I asked what that meant, and he said that if she said no, he'd take it back to just making out. End of story. He wouldn't ever want to put a girl into the position of feeling like he pressured her into anything.

Was this the gay one?

He's the one that when I tell my daughter that she's my favorite daughter, she says, "Aww. Poor Jak. "

He's also the one that got caught with a girl in the living room.

[Habbaku]

Better a dead girl than a live boy.

Wait...

[CountDeMoney]

Or, if you're John Wayne, you will chase her all around the town, paddle her fanny with a coal shovel, and then live happily ever after.

I always preferred the Humphrey Bogart method:  possessing apathy, contempt and a lighter in case the lady desires to smoke.

[Eddie Teach]

Neither of those methods is foolproof. Bogey loses the girl to Paul Henreid, Wayne loses the girl to Jimmy Stewart. Course, they did kinda make the choice themselves. 

[DontSayBanana]

Joe and Sarah gave been dating a while.

They have yet to have sex, although they have talked about it/made out, etc.

Joe wants to have sex, Sarah is not so sure.

Joa and Sarah go out to dinner, and share a bottle of wine. Both are feeling pretty good, and go back to Joe's apartment, where they have some more wine.

Sarah is pretty buzzed, but she still knows that she isn't quite ready to have sex with Joe - maybe soon, but not yet.

They are making out. Joe slides his hand inside Sarahs jeans. She likes it, but realizes thing are going a little fast than she would like.

She asks Joe to slow down, and he does, briefly, but they are still making out.

Sarah realized that her pants are now mostly off. She panics a little bit, and tells Joe to stop. Joe, being a gentleman, does so.

Sarah feels bad, because she does like Joe, and he seems pretty dissapointed, so she decides to go a little further, and performs oral on Joe.

Joe is getting pretty fired up again, Sarah is now shirtless and down to her underwear.

Joe is between her legs, and intercourse is clearly iminent - again. Sarah is feeling pretty worked up herself, and a little bit like she is probably not being entirely reasonable telling Joe no, but still - she just isn't ready.

She asks Joe to stop. Joe is on top of her, and now he is clearly upset/dissapointed. Not violent, or even apparenlty violent, but clearly unhappy at what he sees as being very frustrated.

Joe stops, but places his hand inside the wasteband of her panties, and says "Come on Sarah, we've waited long enough!" and starts sliding down her underwear. Sarah really doesn't want to, but is tired of saying no, so she does not object, but she does not say yes either. Joe removes her panties, and they have intercourse.

Did Joe rape Sarah? Did Joe sexually assault Sarah?

Aaaand that's why the prosecutor has to pitch it to the grand jury, ladies and gents.  FWIW, when I was on the grand jury, we had a case very similar to this.  We ended up deciding it was trial-ready, but it was the single longest set of deliberations for us (that I was involved with, anyway- apparently there was a quadruple homicide the one day that I was too sick to come in).

[CountDeMoney]

apparently there was a quadruple homicide the one day that I was too sick to come in).

Talk about bad luck.

[DontSayBanana]

apparently there was a quadruple homicide the one day that I was too sick to come in).

Talk about bad luck.

Inorite?  I never get nice things.