Was I date raped if I didn't consent until it was already too late?

[ThatwasThen]

Just a side note because I don't want to pile on you when you're already not feeling terrific...but since you seem to have an active sex life, some birth control and a supply of condoms on hand would be a great idea. Having to take Plan B two months in a row is not healthy and can be harmful.

 

Take care.

Yes, I told her a few posts back to get her own supply of condoms and keep one on her at all times and that she shouldn't be relying on anyone but herself to be sexually safe and pregnancy free.. I think men that don't want to wear a rubber usually don't carry them.

[Kfizzle]

sherry Sher: thank you for your contributions to my thread and all this advice, bit I hoenstly think now youre being more than petty and nit picky. yeah I'm sorry, that's just how I deal with things, is lightheartedness, humor and deflection. So sue me. When i tell my family,member about it on the phone i'll probably nervously laugh during more than a few points. Thats just how I cope with my personal situations, is with humor and deflection, even when theres NOTHING humorous about the situation. Now, on the flip side, If I were saying 'lol' in a paragraph where I was giving someone else advice or replying to someone in any way in respect with *their* scenario, then I can see how that would DEFINITELY be an issue. But since its my problem, i don't see how im being insensitive or whatever else?. I didnt say 'lol' or deflect when responding to anyone else's sharing of their experiences, only mine. Honestly don't see why i cant? Sometimes its just automatic when im typing, but nonetheless, im sorry if it offends, I just cant be "poor poor me" and "pity me" all the time, and i dont like coming across as such, so I try to deflect by using lighthearted phrases and abbreviations sometimes. Would never disrespect someone else's situation by using them. Just mine. Oh and I deleted the like 2 or 3 'LMAO' and 'Lol' hat were in that wall of text I wrote. The 'lols' youre thinking of were probably mostly in my text to the guy that I posted, idk. Im not seeing them in any more of my responses in this thread other than those 2 or 3 in my last wall of text where i talked about not wanting to get an unexpected visit from his sisters.

[Kfizzle]

THATWASTHEN QUOTE:

"Yes, I told her a few posts back to get her own supply of condoms and keep one on her at all times and that she shouldn't be relying on anyone but herself to be sexually safe and pregnancy free.. I think men that don't want to wear a rubber usually don't carry them."

 

Yes i would ALWAYS carry a spare box of condoms when i dated this one guy long term a couple years back (he was the boyfriend i gave up my virginity to when I was 24, he lived as a work from home layman in the suburbs of a city with no car to his name, so it was pretty much up to me to get everything for us: food, condoms, electronics when his hard drive on his computer went kaput) but for some reason I never kept any condoms on hand with any of the remaining 3 sexual partners i had in my life after this guy. I dont know why, though i know i probably should start. But birth control pills are first thing and top priority

[Kfizzle]

Sherry Sher, one more thing. I have no qualms about being taken seriously, im a grown woman and kniw hiw to conduct myself in a serious matter such as this without making,it seem like a clownshow and that i cant be taken seriously whatsoever. I think ive hardly exhibited enough 'lols' or lighthearted remarks for that to even be an,issue. And if it is? Then its that person's problem for not taking me and my story seriously...NOT mine. because I know whats true, and im sorry if i just want to show a bit of my personality (Heaven forbid) abd keep things lighthearted even when im already feeling like s**t, and i made a joke to someone about yucky morning breath in this thread,to try to lighten the mood (including mine), and i STILL get trampled on and chastised FOR THAT AS WELL. OH WELL! :) I always try to show a bit of my personality when on the very few online forums that I'm ever even on, when engaging with people, and this instance will be no different despite the serious topic matter. Sorry

[SherrySher]

I find crying rape extremely serious.

 

There are many men who are serving time over scorned women and not actual rape.

 

Many of us have sons and can see the prospective from the mans point of view on why this man could have been seriously confused.

 

None of it is a laughing matter and it can ruin not only a woman's life, but a mans as well.

 

I am not being petty what so ever, I just don't find lol or lmao appropriate when you are accusing someone of something life changing and very serious, one step down from murder.

[figureitout23]

I'm thinking it's time to close this thread...

[Capricorn3]

After reading the original post several times, I can only say that if you press charges, legally, you are all over the place and I highly doubt a charge of rape will stick (imo). You'll need an unbelievably good lawyer to save you from getting ripped apart in court.

[Kfizzle]

Everyone, did I not already make it clear at least 3 or 4,posts ago that due to confusing circumstances, i will very likely NOT even try to press charges? im ok with repeating myself once, but I implore you all to read what i said before you jump onto posting everything that pops into your head, please. I read what people say and let everything sink in before replying. My decision to not pursue legal action was made tentative already, and if I have to solidify it onlibe just for the sake if not being torn to shreds, then so be it. I posted this decision a couple hours ago, in fact, and it frankly doesnt need to be brought up again, as far as the harm that it would cause both parties if I were to make these allegations, how i would be laughed out of court, etc. How I would destroy the life of a man who was more than likely, for all intents and purposes, just confused by my mixed reactions to his advances. THATS *NOT* WHAT I WANT TO HAPPEN, AND AS I GAINED MORE KNOWLEDGE SPEAKING WITH YOU ALL I SOLIDIFIED AND MADE MY TENTATIVE DECISION FINAL. YES, MY REALIZATION OF THIS HAD ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED, PRIoR to me still getting replies about it, AS I LEARNED MORE ABOUT THE LEGAL SYSTEM THROUGH BOTH THIS THREAD AND THROUGH JUST BASIC GOOGLE. YET PEOPLE ARE STILL BRINGING IT UP . Sorry for all caps, but criminy. Hopefully ive cleared *that* up once and for all, yes?

 

I am VERY aware its not a laughing matter, and it would be one thing and would make sense, if i were called out for laughing in form of an LOL in reference to the act or to the rape itself. But the fact of the matter is, im being ripped apart for laughing at something ENTIRELY DIFFERENT. I wasnt laughing AT it, I was laughing at something completely unrelated to the rape itself(I.e. nervous laughter about his sisters coming,to get me if i had worded my text to him differently and it seemed to them like i played him or broke his heart. I wanted to soften things and have another insignificant reason take center stage rather than the ACTUAL reason I was breaking it off with him). JEEZ That 'LOL', and 'LMAO' I just deleted had NOTHING TO DO WITH, AND WERE NOT RELATED IN ANY WAY OR IN any CONTEXT REFERRED TO THE RAPE ITSELF. they were about his freaking sisters. Good god, people. Should I have been born,in the 1920s or are people today soft on the most small insignificant stuff or WHAT? Am I just crazy? The allegations would be staggering, of course I know that. I realized earlier on today that I wasnt going to pursue legal action, but didnt make it clear until that post 3 or 4 ago back in the thread. GOSH, but thank you all. This is the last post I'm writing. Please feel free to close this thread. Sorry for all the novels, everyone, i guess I can see how some info was missed. Im just over it now. Thank,you for all your help and sincerity. I have learned a lot from everyone's heartfelt responses and personal stances on the subject. From the bottom of my heart, everyone,thank you. The response I have gotten from my initial post has been overwhelming, to say the least. Hopefully I didn't miss responding my individual thanks to anyone, and if I did, then THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. Peace and blessings, everyone.

[Sportster2005]

Why are you asking us and not a prosecutor/police? Some things shouldn't be left to the opinion of Internet strangers.

[Wiseman2]

Agree. What precisely constitutes a crime you would to send him to jail for can be determined by law enforcement and attorneys.

Why are you asking us and not a prosecutor/police?

[polarseltzer]

I'm frankly appalled at some of the responses here. To the poster saying she's "crying rape", your words are dangerous and frankly wrong. She feels violated and is reaching out to make sense of what happened. This is not a scorned woman making up.

As someone who was raped by a very close family member for nearly a year of my life, I can tell you that when it happened, no you don't know that you'll scream and fight. My reaction was to pretend it wasn't happening because of the utter shock it caused to my system. And that for myself, my only coping mechanism after was convincing myself I caused it all to happen. My suggestion is if you feel violated, please find someone you trust or a therapist to talk with. Repressing these feelings because some jerks on the internet are trying to change your narrative is only going to damage you more. Please seek out help, and I'm truly sorry you are experiencing the feelings you are.

[Batya33]

Nevermind -didn't read the subsequent posts.

[maew]

I'm frankly appalled at some of the responses here. To the poster saying she's "crying rape", your words are dangerous and frankly wrong. She feels violated and is reaching out to make sense of what happened. This is not a scorned woman making up.

As someone who was raped by a very close family member for nearly a year of my life, I can tell you that when it happened, no you don't know that you'll scream and fight. My reaction was to pretend it wasn't happening because of the utter shock it caused to my system. And that for myself, my only coping mechanism after was convincing myself I caused it all to happen. My suggestion is if you feel violated, please find someone you trust or a therapist to talk with. Repressing these feelings because some jerks on the internet are trying to change your narrative is only going to damage you more. Please seek out help, and I'm truly sorry you are experiencing the feelings you are.

 

Agreed,it absolutely sickens me. IMO this is the problem with our society today... instead of teaching men to respect women and their boundaries, and to stop when they are told to stop, we teach women how to take responsibility for men's behaviors, because somehow men shouldn't have to control themselves... yes we DO this by telling women it is up to them to be clear, that they need to be the ones to stop it instead of the man actually asking for consent... that it's the woman's responsibility to cover up / dress appropriately, it's the woman's responsibility not to lead the man on, that oh it feels good but wait stop it's going too fast or I didn't want you to go that far... UGH it makes me just so angry.

 

As someone who has had to fend off many a boundary crossing comment, inappropriate touching or staring, and yes full on assault and rape, I can honestly say it is rare to encounter a man that actually respects my boundaries and treats me like a full on human being, not just a sex object. I don't encourage the behavior in any way from these people it just happens, over and over again until I just end up shutting down completely.

 

It's not the responsibility or fault of the OP that this dude took advantage of her... if she said she didn't consent, then she DIDN'T. How she responded to him or in this thread to comments has zero bearing on whether or not he assaulted her.. and assault her he did from the sounds of it.

 

OP, I am sorry this happened to you and whether or not you want to press charges is entirely up to you... do seek therapy and support for this though, as this sort of thing leaves a permanent mark. :(

[Seraphim]

Absolutely, it is NOT a woman’s fault when she is sexually assaulted. I taught my son to respect all and to clearly ask for consent every.single.time. No matter what kind of relationship it is.

[thealchemist]

It is kind of a catch 22.

 

So I understand how awkward the explicit and direct conversation about sex is.

 

Also, decent guys, or ones with some sense of nonverbal queues don't need that talk. It should be obvious to most of them.

 

Especially for a first time encounter.

 

But they are also not the guys that will do this crap anyways.

 

The crappy guys that do this look for someone who IS ambiguous with boundaries. They look for someone they can push, and push, and push, until they get their way. Or at least until they have isolated you enough that compliance is irrelevant.

 

They also know what they are doing. Don't fool yourself.

 

It isn't like every guy is potentially a rapist and some just lose control. There might be some people in the grey area that can go either way depending on circumstance, but that is a minority.

 

Guys who rape woman are rapists. They aren't just normal guys who lost control (or at least very very rarely).

 

So a decent guy makes these steps pointless, but it isn't those guys you should worry about.

 

But it can be very very hard to know which guy is which.

 

I know I have scared the sh*t out of some woman before. They saw me out late around campus because I would study until the early hours of the morning at the student union.

 

I also can appear intimidating.

 

But I have seen how scared many woman have been who were walking out late around campus and saw me there, then suddenly realize that it is just is two and no one else is around.

 

I have even had a girl bolt away and the have campus police come over and harass me over it.

 

The ironic thing is, unbeknownst to these woman, I was a woman's self defense trainer. I also would have done anything in my power to ensure they were not hurt.

 

I might seem scary but I am utterly harmless to anyone not attempting to hurt others.

 

But my point is you can never really know someone's true potential. So trust should be very sparingly given. Especially if that trust is with someone you do not know.

 

Just know that predatorial people look for others who they think they can control. They want someone who they can isolate and pressure into awkwardness so they can get their way.

 

They love indirectness and ambiguity because they are more allowed to push the indistinct boundary with less consequences.

 

Actions speak louder than words but as a child I was raised to be a predatorial male.

 

That is not the path I walk but it is still an awareness I have.

[abitbroken]

Bottom line - rape or no rape.

Use this as a learning experience that you need to make sure your physical body language and actions match what your desires are.

If you don't wish to have sex, don't open your pants. Its very simple.

Don't invite a man who you barely know into your bed.

If you tell a man no sex -- then don't change your mind midstream - do it another time.

That's being in control.

Make your no means no and your yes mean yes. saying "no" but unzipping your pants is a "yes".

Saying "no" and changing your posture to a non making out posture, redirecting hands or doing something else "hey, let's take a walk/go to the malt shop" is a No.

A "maybe" is not a no.

 

There was a woman here who said she draped herself naked across his bed -- and cried assault when he laid down next to her and kissed her and started cradling her breast (i think he was NOT in the bedroom and she went in first) because "she told him prior she didn't want sex". then, sweetie, keep your clothes on and don't lounge in your birthday suit on his bed..

 

If you know a guy only one month -- meet for dinner, go bowling, - whatever -- and say goodnight before the bars close/////

[Batya33]

"Make your no means no and your yes mean yes. saying "no" but unzipping your pants is a "yes"."

 

I don't agree -if you discuss it clearly beforehand that intercourse is not ok (or oral, or whatever) then unzipping your pants or letting them be unzipped means that you're ok having your pants unzipped and being touched there -doesn't change a no to a yes as far as intercourse. Lots of people (including me) have heavy foreplay/petting knowing it will not include intercourse for whatever reason. If the man isn't comfortable or will feel too frustrated for some reason he can say no to fooling around half-naked. It's a slippery slope -no pun intended -"she said no intercourse, but gave me that come-hither look/she let me get on top of her with our clothing on....." - there's no exact science and yes a person can change his or her mind whenever and also be compassionate that the other person might be all worked up when that change of mind happens. I think it's really fun and exciting and pleasurable to fool around and do heavy petting even if the woman says beforehand "no intercourse" but the man would be ok with it - he gets to say "no" beforehand and if he says yes he signs up for any downside -like maybe feeling frustrated if he doesn't orgasm a different way, etc. She changed her mind during and he should have stopped. She wrote that she was not opposed to intercourse before they were alone which is why she didn't bring it up. So he was entitled to try to have sex and she was entitled to say "no" at that point.

 

I think the unzip pants issue comes up a heck of a lot more when alcohol is involved and when the people have only been out once or twice. If you've been out 4-5 times over a month or so and you have that discussion and you've already kissed/cuddled etc chances are that there will be far less risk that the man would assume the woman changed her mind because she unzipped her pants.

[maew]

Bottom line - rape or no rape.

Use this as a learning experience that you need to make sure your physical body language and actions match what your desires are.

If you don't wish to have sex, don't open your pants. Its very simple.

Don't invite a man who you barely know into your bed.

If you tell a man no sex -- then don't change your mind midstream - do it another time.

That's being in control.

Make your no means no and your yes mean yes. saying "no" but unzipping your pants is a "yes".

Saying "no" and changing your posture to a non making out posture, redirecting hands or doing something else "hey, let's take a walk/go to the malt shop" is a No.

A "maybe" is not a no.

 

There was a woman here who said she draped herself naked across his bed -- and cried assault when he laid down next to her and kissed her and started cradling her breast (i think he was NOT in the bedroom and she went in first) because "she told him prior she didn't want sex". then, sweetie, keep your clothes on and don't lounge in your birthday suit on his bed..

 

If you know a guy only one month -- meet for dinner, go bowling, - whatever -- and say goodnight before the bars close/////

 

Sorry, but no. No means no, even if she were completely naked. No never means "maybe" or "yes"... it means no. Period. And a "maybe" is not an automatic yes.

 

A woman is entitled to change her mind at any point in the interaction, even if he is already inside. A man is not entitled to a woman's body just because it happens to be available (i.e. naked, or even half naked).

 

Like I said earlier, this is way of thinking is part of the problem... putting the burden on the woman to protect herself and to be the one that has to set boundaries vs. placing the burden on the men to get clear consent before they continue... we all get caught up in the heat of the moment, but like the alchemist said, a respectful man would NEVER take advantage of a woman that told him no.. or even maybe.

 

It's a sad world we live in :(

[Batya33]

Sorry, but no. No means no, even if she were completely naked. No never means "maybe" or "yes"... it means no. Period. And a "maybe" is not an automatic yes.

 

A woman is entitled to change her mind at any point in the interaction, even if he is already inside. A man is not entitled to a woman's body just because it happens to be available (i.e. naked, or even half naked).

 

Like I said earlier, this is way of thinking is part of the problem... putting the burden on the woman to protect herself and to be the one that has to set boundaries vs. placing the burden on the men to get clear consent before they continue... we all get caught up in the heat of the moment, but like the alchemist said, a respectful man would NEVER take advantage of a woman that told him no.. or even maybe.

 

It's a sad world we live in :(

 

I don't think women should play with fire -not because otherwise they'll be blamed but because it's not fair to send mixed messages - and we can all disagree on what would be a mixed message -and on a practical level in today's world that might be the difference between her getting justice and otherwise. There's a way to not play with fire and also not feel like it's a woman's burden to protect herself. Would you walk down the street in a known bad neighborhood wearing flashy expensive jewelry and singing to draw attention to yourself and then be shocked that you were the target of a robbery (man or woman). We all take precautions to protect ourselves against crime. We all know how risky it is to meet a stranger on a first meet at his home. Is it then our fault if we are the victim of a crime -rape or otherwise? No, not our fault and on the other hand not behaving in a self-care/self-protective way. And even the most respectful guy can get confused and think that actions =consent like the example of the guy I was dating for 6 months and we'd barely made out and never had our clothes off. I asked if I could crash at his place, knew it probably meant his bed because of his roommate, and he got on top of me in bed and thought we were going to have sex. He did not try to remove my clothes or penetrate me but he assumed when I asked to stay over -because I wasn't clear - that I meant we were going to have sex after dating for 5 months. I wasn't clear at all. Very respectful guy who found himself with the woman he'd been dating in his bed who'd asked to stay over. Really -you're going to blame him for thinking that I meant by my request and getting in his bed that I was ready to have sex with him? I don't. Here's the respectful part -when I told him I wasn't ready he stopped pursuing it right then. And I apologized for the mixed messages. My fault.

[Cope]

Setting boundaries does not stop a rapist. Sure, you may win the case, but is that the objective?

[Batya33]

Setting boundaries does not stop a rapist. Sure, you may win the case, but is that the objective?

 

Of course it doesn't but setting boundaries can avoid awkward or unpleasant situations with people who mean well and are confused. I once assumed a man was coming on to me and I flirted heavily back. His girlfriend (didn't know it was his girlfriend -they acted like classmates at our grad school) got mad at her boyfriend for joking around with me in a way that was obviously taken as flirting by me. Good guy who crossed a boundary and confused me about his intentions. I don't think most people ask specifically for consent with every act like kissing/touching, etc. I do think when it comes to intercourse there should be a specific discussion because of STDs/pregnancy especially if the two people don't know each other very well.

[Cope]

Of course it doesn't but setting boundaries can avoid awkward or unpleasant situations with people who mean well and are confused.

 

In generally, I agree, but we are talking about rape here. Boundaries or no boundaries set, when a person says no, it's no. Since he continued, he raped her and I'm seeing a lot of blaming going on as if it was the OP's fault because she didn't set clear boundaries or she unzipped her pants.

 

So yeah, setting boundaries does not stop a rapist. A rapist will rape. A self entitled man will rape and sometimes there is no way of knowing that beforehand, no matter how hard and successfully you think you assert yourself. If I'm with a partner that just SEEMS half in it, I'd back off and I have. If he says "I'm not really into it" even with his D hanging out in the open, I back off and I have. How hard is it to understand? What makes it different for men?

 

It is more about how he acted and less about how she acted yet I see a lot of "poor confused guy" posts and it's sad to say the least. Also a lot of "If I were in your place" posts. Behind our keyboards it's easy to assume what we would do "IF", but we aren't and some of us have never been. For example, I am pro choice, but I honestly don't know what I would choose if I ever gotten pregnant because I've never been in that place. It's the same thing.

 

We need to at least try to get as much as we can in her place. Really imagine ourselves with a full grown, fit man on top of us. I'm not even going to get in the details of the psychological factor and the background of a woman (not the OP, in general) who for decades have been taught to be followers, especially to a man's needs. Just having a human being who could hurt me if I resisted is enough for me to say "ok, it will be over faster than I might think" and then not kicking him out because I'm scared. Even if I don't show that I'm scared, it's there, working in the background, by default.

[Batya33]

In generally, I agree, but we are talking about rape here. Boundaries or no boundaries set, when a person says no, it's no. Since he continued, he raped her and I'm seeing a lot of blaming going on as if it was the OP's fault because she didn't set clear boundaries or she unzipped her pants.

 

So yeah, setting boundaries does not stop a rapist. A rapist will rape. A self entitled man will rape and sometimes there is no way of knowing that beforehand, no matter how hard and successfully you think you assert yourself. If I'm with a partner that just SEEMS half in it, I'd back off and I have. If he says "I'm not really into it" even with his D hanging out in the open, I back off and I have. How hard is it to understand? What makes it different for men?

 

It is more about how he acted and less about how she acted yet I see a lot of "poor confused guy" posts and it's sad to say the least. Also a lot of "If I were in your place" posts. Behind our keyboards it's easy to assume what we would do "IF", but we aren't and some of us have never been. For example, I am pro choice, but I honestly don't know what I would choose if I ever gotten pregnant because I've never been in that place. It's the same thing.

 

We need to at least try to get as much as we can in her place. Really imagine ourselves with a full grown, fit man on top of us. I'm not even going to get in the details of the psychological factor and the background of a woman (not the OP, in general) who for decades have been taught to be followers, especially to a man's needs. Just having a human being who could hurt me if I resisted is enough for me to say "ok, it will be over faster than I might think" and then not kicking him out because I'm scared. Even if I don't show that I'm scared, it's there, working in the background, by default.

 

Yes and I can relate - been there - and I did that and posted many times that once she said NO he needed to stop right then. Beforehand I don't think he did the wrong thing by pursuing sex. He did do the wrong thing once she said no.

 

It's nothing to do really with what I wrote since it wasn't gender-based (it was gender-based in this particular situation but not generally).

 

There are ways of reducing the risk. Stay sober. Don't invite strangers or near-strangers to your home especially if there is alcohol involved. Have the discussion beforehand. All those will give the person clues as to the other person's intentions, honorable or otherwise and if there's sobriety and avoiding being alone with a stranger when you're not sure you want to have sex, that's a good way to reduce the risk. I'm not going to call a person a rapist for trying to pursue sex with another person who has invited him/her into their home and gotten into bed with no other discussion. Once there is a "no" it's over right then.

 

Interestingly, FWIW I have always been pro choice and knew from a young age that it would not include my being willing to have an abortion (other than if I were raped ,etc). And I didn't get pregnant until my early 40s. I have been assaulted sexually and otherwise and I don't believe in the "you cannot understand unless you've experienced it" -I think humans are much more capable of empathy and understanding than that . Seen it first hand many times.

[j.man]

We need to at least try to get as much as we can in her place. Really imagine ourselves with a full grown, fit man on top of us. I'm not even going to get in the details of the psychological factor and the background of a woman (not the OP, in general) who for decades have been taught to be followers, especially to a man's needs. Just having a human being who could hurt me if I resisted is enough for me to say "ok, it will be over faster than I might think" and then not kicking him out because I'm scared. Even if I don't show that I'm scared, it's there, working in the background, by default.

With the disclaimer that I completely agree that no boundary setting would have stopped him from continuing after she said no, and that, after that point, it most definitely was rape, I think this paragraph really sings loudly to many women who haven't actually said no, and who, by the simple virtue of a fit man being on top of her, may be unwilling to do so, or even too afraid to stop giving non-verbal cues, incidentally feeling as though they'd been raped or violated afterward.

 

I believe the point of setting specific boundaries benefits those who are less able (or, more likely for Batya's case, not so much less able as much as simply not wanting) to assert themselves when a guy does start testing new levels without an established ceiling. I mean, I've had a couple women explicitly tell me "no sex" only to find them 10 minutes later trying to guide my junk in (which is a big "see ya" from me, as it should be for any man who values not going to jail), but assuming someone like the OP is, for her part, personally sticking to the stated boundaries, that's what would make the difference between being able to rationally assume pants off, underwear to the side definitely means fingers coming in and not a penis, when a penis going in would otherwise pretty naturally follow the sequence of events. And, in the OP's scenario, it's what would unequivocally make the initial penetration rape rather than when he'd kept going after she said no.

 

But, again, if anyone were to conflate that point to mean there's any remote guarantee he'd have laid off if she stated explicitly what was off the table, I'd say they're dead wrong. Laying out boundaries is a matter of trust that goes very much hand-in-hand with going to someone's house alone. And if it turns out that trust was misplaced, that's of course not the victim's fault.

[j.man]

We need to at least try to get as much as we can in her place. Really imagine ourselves with a full grown, fit man on top of us. I'm not even going to get in the details of the psychological factor and the background of a woman (not the OP, in general) who for decades have been taught to be followers, especially to a man's needs. Just having a human being who could hurt me if I resisted is enough for me to say "ok, it will be over faster than I might think" and then not kicking him out because I'm scared. Even if I don't show that I'm scared, it's there, working in the background, by default.

With the disclaimer that I completely agree that no boundary setting would have stopped him from continuing after she said no, and that, after that point, it most definitely was rape, I think this paragraph really sings loudly to many women who haven't actually said no, and who, by the simple virtue of a fit man being on top of her, may be unwilling to do so, or even too afraid to stop giving non-verbal cues, incidentally feeling as though they'd been raped or violated afterward.

 

I believe the point of setting specific boundaries benefits those who are less able to (or, more likely for Batya's case, not so much less able as much as simply not wanting to) assert themselves when a guy does start testing new levels without an established ceiling. I mean, I've had a couple women explicitly tell me "no sex" only to find them 10 minutes later trying to guide my junk in (which is a big "see ya" from me, as it should be for any man who values not going to jail), but assuming someone like the OP is, for her part, personally sticking to the stated boundaries, that's what would make the difference between being able to rationally assume pants off, underwear to the side definitely means fingers coming in and not a penis, when a penis going in would otherwise pretty naturally follow the sequence of events. And, in the OP's scenario, it's what would unequivocally make the initial penetration rape rather than when he'd kept going after she said no. Given the more broad direction the thread has turned, I think the point is more to women it has happened to and who have had the guy stop immediately upon being told to.

 

But, again, if anyone were to conflate that point to mean there's any remote guarantee he'd have laid off if she stated explicitly what was off the table, I'd say they're dead wrong. Laying out boundaries is a matter of trust that goes very much hand-in-hand with going to someone's house alone. And if it turns out that trust was misplaced, that's of course not the victim's fault.