Sexual coercion: tactics, implications and outcomes

Thanks Michelle! So where's the discussion? Seems pretty obvious sexual coercion as described in that link is wrong and akin to rape as remind said. Is the discussion about what qualifies as sexual coercion?

Isn't it a bit of a cop-out to attribute sexual coercion to "poor understanding" or being "ill-informed"? To coerce someone into sex - which I have never had a woman do to me BTW - seems more a question of getting what you want regardess of the other person's disinterest, than one of lack of information or misunderstanding. It seems to me that the writer is making a big effort to avoid seeming confrontational - not the best way to address a confrontational interaction, such as wheedling a woman out of a "pity fuck", as they are called...

Well, I think a lot of people don't understand coercion, and don't understand relationship dynamics that make women feel pressured to consent to sex even when they don't want to.  For instance, I think a lot of women can relate to partners who beg and beg and beg and beg and beg and beg for sex when they don't feel like it, and I think a lot of us can relate to giving in even when we don't want to, in order to get some peace.

Is that the same thing as being physically forced to have sex?  My personal opinion is, no, it's not.  But I believe that it is emotionally abusive, and I also think it's somewhat sexually abusive.  But so many men have no idea that this kind of behaviour - begging for sex, trying to coerce their partners into sex by being angry and sullen if they say no, knowing perfectly well that their partner doesn't want to have sex but doing their best to pressure them into "giving in" - to me, that is sexually abusive.  Is it rape?  I'm not sure - I do think that physically forcing a woman to have sex against her will is more serious than emotionally manipulating her into it. 

But if only more men would see such behaviour, at the very least, as abusive, if not rape or sexual assault.  But from my experience talking to female friends, and my own personal experience in relationships, this kind of behaviour is depressingly common.  As is begging for certain kinds of sex that their partners feel uncomfortable with, and badgering their partner to do it until they finally wear them down and they just do it.  I'll never understand why there are guys who want to do stuff that their partners clearly aren't into - that would totally kill the mood for me and make me feel self-conscious - but there you go.

Why don't women leave guys who pull shit like this?  Good question.  A lot of us eventually do.  But the problem is, because this is not commonly recognized for what it is - abusive behaviour - a lot of women who experience it just figure, well, this is just one of those annoying things that men do, a normal part of the relationship.  And the fact is, it's such common behaviour that many of us resign ourselves to it, because we know chances are good that the next guy we are with will be the same way.

I suppose there are probably cases of women coercing men into sex too, but I don't think it happens anywhere near as much as the other way around.

Michelle wrote:

I'll never understand why there are guys who want to do stuff that their partners clearly aren't into - that would totally kill the mood for me and make me feel self-conscious - but there you go.

I don't think that one partner wanting to try something the other is uncomfortable with is that hard to understand. Placing that desire for gratification above concern for your partner is what I don't understand. I've had relationships where I might have wanted things a partner wasn't comfortable with, I don't think its a problem if I keep that to myself and don't pressure them; I don't think people should be condemned for desires alone, but for how they act on them, especially if such acts are against their partner's wishes.

Michelle wrote:

I suppose there are probably cases of women coercing men into sex too, but I don't think it happens anywhere near as much as the other way around.

I'm sure its less common. I do think sexual coercion by women is alot more common than physical abuse by women though.

Well, the thing is, I think women aren't "forced" to have sex when we are being begged for sex.  Blackmail and threats are different, of course - in that case, yes, we are being forced to choose between having sex or having the person do something bad to us.

But begging for sex, pleading for it, being sullen if she says no - that's not "forcing" her, that's emotional pressuring.  Which is still abusive and still bad, but I wouldn't say that if we give in to such tactics that we're being "forced".  As full human beings with our own decision-making capabilities, we can still choose not to consent.  We can choose to say, okay, he's angry and it's not my problem.

Now, is this easy?  No.  Is such behaviour emotionally abusive?  Absolutely.  But I think it's important for women to recognize where we do have agency, and this is one of those times.  If more of us thought to ourselves, "His unhappiness is HIS problem, not mine, and no, I actually DON'T have to give in and have sex just because he's being a big whiny fucking baby," then not only might we find ourselves not staring at the ceiling and thinking of England while asswipe is getting his rocks off, but we might also start to see this kind of behaviour for what it is - disgusting, degrading, manipulative, abusive.  And we might just say to ourselves, "Why am I with someone who acts like this?  Isn't being alone better than being with someone like this?"

RP: Thats quite a sad statement It also seems to imply that one party is generally coerced... which I hope isn't the norm for most people!

Also, if this is a trap, can I call you Admiral Ackbar?

ETA: Thinking of England Michelle?

I didn't think about it much remind until I saw this discussion.  Doesn't really bother me, I'm the one with privilege, sorry about that.  I'll think a bit more.

Good internet sub-culture (or just plain old sci-fi nerd) knowledge Maysie I sent RP a pic of Ackbar by PM so as not to derail the thread.

Michelle, I'm standing up and APPLAUDING your post #16. It's certainly a very thin line between being emotionally abused, as you clearly describe it, and being forced or coerced. So why not define such very real abuse as the problem rather than quibble about "coercion"? I am hopeful when I read remind saying that men can be challenged about it and made to understand we must stop - even if it is by throwing us out. I learned that way back in my first relationship. But I think the problem is that many, many men would rather abuse then play fair if it gets us "nookie".

As for whether men or women do it more, doesn't the always present threat of physical force make it non-symetrical? The fact that if push comes to shove, men can rape much more easily than women, while women can only wheedle. AND there's the privilege as RP points out.

Sophistry. We do not "assume that his next step will be physical coercion." That's why he pouts. Then talks loudly, Then slams doors, etc. (thanks remind for that vivid M.O.) They are all warning signals and they generally work, so he doesn't have to physically assault her... to physically "get" her.

We can and should discuss these tactics as abuse in themselves. Otherwise, your argument is that of the cop who says that as long as he doesn't try to kill you, well he can't do anything about the detailed threat he laid on you. That's B-S.

Quote:

Otherwise, your argument is that of the cop who says that as long as he doesn't try to kill you, well he can't do anything about the detailed threat he laid on you. That's B-S.

I don't agree that sulking is a "detailed threat", speaking of B-S.

Pouting is something people do.  Kids don't have good skills for dealing with not getting something they want, so they tend to do it a lot, and in turn, we tend to associate pouting with juvenile behaviour.  But adults do it too, male or female, and for all kinds of things they want.

In discussing this, in this and the previous thread, I had assumed that that's what we were talking about.  If we're really talking about violence now then I expect a short, one-sided discussion:  YES, we all agree that violent coercion is wrong.  So what's left to discuss?  Other than the fact that now a lot of sulky, mopey guys who have absolutely no intention of physically harming their partner have been defined as rapists.  But better an innocent man be caught than a guilty man get away.  That's how that saying goes, right?

And that's just from the day to day drama I get.  Maybe not enough male friends. 

Agreed martin but I don't find many males pouty, but I abhor rapists and perhaps the distiction needs to be made among other descriptors used.

Are you saying all males are rapists? You say you abhor them, so that can't be it. Do you feel that all males pout and whine and wheedle to get sex? I don't (although I have done worse).

Also - maybe the reason you don't find males pouty is that you aren't on the receiving end when they want sex? It's sometimes a hell of a place to be in but women have a privileged vantage point that we need to learn from if we really want to understand men.

G'night (under the covers with my cat! I never say no to her...)

And I'm sorry if you felt I was browbeating you by answering your points.

It seems to me that "pouting" happens when there is a communication breakdown. The mouth is closed because words have not managed to convince (etymology: "vanquish") the other, so one makes a face to express displeasure and maintain pressure. I find that, among themselves, women manage to maintain communication, be it with others (gossip), at times of disagreement, while in their interactions with men, communication shuts down for lack of a common language (other than sex FWIW). Hence, occasionally, pouting, and, from men, body language such as door slamming and ultimately violence, which gives them an edge, hence a non-symetrcal situation that benefits men. Women may pout at men, but they cannot take the confrontation much further. Men can and do, and it becomes rape and/or battery.

The unexamined issue is "Why is sex so important to people that they are ready to put so much pressure for "it" on unwilling parties?" (I am making an effort to voice this gender-neutrally, but I think it is a male issue.)

remind: Are you saying that the husband in this example is obligated to fullfil his marital duties?

But if the woman threatens to leave, to have her needs met elsewhere, that's rape, yes?  So I guess she's in a bit of a sticky wicket.

Bait on your right, bait on your right... swim on, woman!