Do you agree with the Swedish rape laws?

[Anonymous]

Apparently (as we saw in the Wikileaks' Julius Assange case), a woman can "withdraw consent" midway through the sex act. Or even a day or two after having consentual sex. Which sounds bizarre to me.

[Crystal98000]

Absolutely I agree! If a women feels at any time she has second thoughts, or doesn't want to continue, its her right to withdraw consent. Consensual sex is only consensual as long as both parties agree to and approve of the act the entire way. If a girl has second thoughts and wants to stop, yes the guy doesn't stop it's rape plain and simple! There's nothing "bizarre" about it. Very simple actually.

If a girl feels threatened or in danger during the act, sometimes even saying "stop" or anything like that can be seen by the girl as a possibility to invite more harm or or force upon her. It's very subjective but that's the nature of rape, every case is different. This protects women from that ambiguity.

As far as withdrawing consent a day or two after the act, this too is subjective to the actual circumstance. A woman may feel violated by the act later after being able to reflect upon it. Especially under situations where alcohol is involved and she feels that she was unwillingly taken advantage of in the moment due to inebriation and inability to give proper consent. That can be seen as rape and prosecuted as such. This has happened many time in the US too.

Why should a woman be forced to limit her time to consent right at the start of the act? At any time she feels uncomfortable and wants to stop. The guy should stop, plain and simple! In my view, these laws should be expanded and implemented here. There should never be a statute of limitations on the time a girl consents to sex!

[Thiezz]

> There should never be a statute of limitations on the time a girl consents to sex! That's f***ing ridiculous. You really want a situation where anyone (who am I kidding with such gender-neutral speech: I mean any woman of course...) can arbitrarily withdraw consent for any instance she's had sex during her lifetime and have the partner convicted of rape? Don't you see the EXTREME possibility of abuse her? "Hey ex-boyfriend, give me some money or be convicted of rape."

[Asker]

The point is, at what point can one "withdraw consent"? Half-way through the sex act? A day after having sex and having no complaints over it? This seems a certain way of emasculating one of our two genders. The laws are suited to the 19th century, when women got into bed with great reluctance, and the possibility of pregnancy was a very real fear with each sex act. In the 21st century, the equations are quite different! For that matter, even a guy could be "raped" by a woman now!

[selfishstars]

Yes, you can withdraw consent at any point during the sexual act. You should be able to change your mind, even if you've already started having sex. There are a lot of reasons why someone might start to have sex, but decide that they don't want to continue: maybe they had a lapse of judgment and thought they wanted to, but realize that they don't; maybe it's painful; maybe the other person is being too rough or wants to do things that they aren't comfortable with, etc. Sure, it sucks that you might be getting into it with someone and then they change their mind midway, but that doesn't give you the right to keep going if they ask you to stop. Can you imagine how it would feel if you wanted someone to stop, asked them to, but they ignored your request and kept going?

But I don't agree with the ability to withdraw consent after the fact. If you consented at the time, that's what matters. The person had sex with you believing that you wanted to have sex, if you don't give them any indication that you don't want to have sex, they can't read your mind. If you had told them no or that you wanted them to stop, they likely would have---but since you didn't, they had no reason to think they should stop. If you don't want it at the time, you need to be assertive and tell the other person no. And you can't decide after the fact that you regret it and then say that the other person raped you.

[tohrment]

Eurgh.

Nonetheless, you didn't really put it into context. In reference to the belated rebuttal of consent during prior intercourse, it's regarding misrepresentations and whatnot where the victim would not have had sex with the alleged perpetrator had they not deceived them. In the Assange Case it was about him taking off his condom, I believe. I agree that unequal power relations between the parties might void the sincerely expressed consent of one party.

However, I disagree with how Sweden is morphing their sexual offence laws. I think Swedish rape laws undermine women. They suggest that women can't determine whether or not they have been raped. I understand that Sweden is trying to regulate sex in a way that minimises STDs and whatnot, but this is BS.

In short I agree that women should be able to withdraw consent midway throughout the sex act. However, the very prospect that consent can be withdrawn days afterward goes against what the criminal justice system should stand for, in my opinion.

[Thiezz]

Midway I think is quite reasonable, but afterward makes no sense at all. You can't retroactively change things like consent because that leaves you in a situation where certain parties (the guy, in this situation) have no possibility to predict the consequences of their actions, and, assuming they want to have sex at some point in their lives, are completely incapable of doing so in a way that is guaranteed not to be a crime.

Besides, what if both parties withdraw consent afterwards? Did they rape each other (no doubt the hypothetical ruling would be in favour of the woman involved...)?

[Asker]

Should a broken condom = rape? And what exactly is "using body weight to hold her down"? If I'm in bed with a naked woman, what is the assumption on both minds? That we are in that pose, ready to say our prayers? Sorry if I sound like a MCP (male chauvinist pig), but this seems outright bizarre. If they wanted to 'get' Assange for showing the Western liberal "democracies" in bad light, that's another thing.

[l-hedoniste]

I agree with withdrawing consent during the act. Consent is a decision, not a contract; it can be given or withdrawn at any time, for any reason or no reason whatever.

But withdrawing consent after the act doesn't quite make sense to me; I don't see how you retroactively withdraw consent from someone you've already willingly slept with.

P.S.: Be very aware that consent as a act and consent as a Swedish legal term could--and probably do--have wildly different meanings.

[Asker]

This can make it very hard for a guy! You make him all charged up, let him sleep with your naked body... and then tell him, hang-on, you can't penetrate me! Isn't this another word for cock-teasing?

[l-hedoniste]

Here's the choice: if you don't penetrate her, it's cock-teasing. If you do, it's rape. Which is better?

[Brando]

Beyond the sex, no.

[Carping]

I agree with you there. Someone in their law system is not thinking straight

[Asker]

A nice example how a good idea can be taken to a ludicrous extent. Initially, I guess, such laws were meant to protect women. Now, when women are into sex as much as men are (mostly), it's a kind of joke! The assumption here seems to be that it is men who are coercing women into sex (or pressurising them, at the very least) most of the time!

[Hyped_up_on_coffee]

The midway thing is reasonable but the later one is just nuts!

[zickzack]

Such a luck not to live in Sweden! Men are going on very thin ice, if they have contact with women.

This country isn`t there for men, only for women.

[Asker]

The intentions this started out with was probably good -- getting a fair deal for women. But then, everything can cross limits... even a good thing!

[SnackG]

The midway through I agree with, but a day or two after doesn't make sense.

[Asker]

I mean this is unusual too... I can understand a woman saying no from the start, and a guy going against that. This would clearly be rape. But if a woman is showing all signs of being an equal participant in the sex act, and suddenly changes her mind, what is the guy supposed to do?

[Thiezz]

> But if a woman is showing all signs of being an equal participant in the sex act, and suddenly changes her mind, what is the guy supposed to do? Stop and pull out? It's not rocket science...

[internet_user]

Masturbate

[Asker]

My point is, she shouldn't have got into bed with the guy in the first place. This becomes terribly, terribly confusing for the guy. Talk about sending out mixed signals?

[Thiezz]

> This becomes terribly, terribly confusing for the guy. Talk about sending out mixed signals? What an excellent idea. Stop and talk about those mixed signals she's sending. :p Seriously though, don't you think their right not to have sex when they don't want to (any more) is more important than your right not to be confused?

[Asker]

Yeah, I would respect the woman's right to decide... provided she isn't so terribly confused about it. Their right to throw an ex-lover in jail for two to six years is also to be respected...

[Anonymous]

During consent, yes she should be able to withdraw consent. It is her body and she has a right to decide whether or not she would like to continue to have sex. He needs to pull out and respect her wishes. Sex involves 2 people, if 1 isn't willing anymore then the other person needs to stop, if not, that is rape.

I don't get how you would do that a day or 2 after you had sex. You can not continue to have sex with that person again, but you can't take back what you did Tuesday night.

[Asker]

It's not just about withdrawing consent. It's about sex-turning-into-rape! This, I think, as a male, is terribly, terribly unfair. I wouldn't ever risk having sex in Sweden!

[Anonymous]

Why can't the guy withdraw consent in the middle then and claim the same thing? Or after the fact?

[Asker]

Good question. It is presumed that women can't rape a man. That it's only the man who's into having sex with just about anyone. So we have 19th century thinking imposed on a 21st century reality, I guess...

[Opinion Owner]

Wow. That's not a great foundation for justice now, is it? And if I can decide that I'd rather not have had sex after the fact, then I'm pretty sure that could apply to anyone. What a mess!

[Anonymous]

I understand mid way through I guess.. why someone would do that is beyond me but I get it.

A few days later? now I can understand regretting it but unless you were totally trashed and didn't remember for a few days or drugged or something because I understand that a little better I guess... I don't know that's a hard one to prove reguardless

[Asker]

Thanks for your comments. I agree and you're being reasonable here!

[Anonymous]

No, but the laws in Sweden were brought in heavily on one side to correct a long term imbalance in the rape laws, if I remember rightly.

Like many reactionary motions, they erred too far on the other side as well.

[Asker]

What was the "long term imbalance" in Sweden? Was it worse than other countries (agreed, that you have some pretty bad, anti-women laws in parts of the world).