Sexual coercion: tactics, implications and outcomes

Edited to: speaking of bait, I'm just going to stop taking it, enjoy your thread martin, I won't be so much as looking in again so I hope you feel a sense of accomplishment.

Well, in fairness remind, to a large extent at this level, all we are left with is assumptions-- failing some Vulcan mind meld.

remind wrote:

No man, nor woman, has the right to show displeasure if their partner does not want to have sex, end of story.

I completely disagree with this.  I think this is where the danger comes in when we call it "rape" when a guy whines and a woman consents.  The guy is totally being a jerk, definitely, but if the woman consents, and she's not being physically forced or blackmailed into it (and I don't count "emotional blackmail" as in, I'll pout if you say no), then she's not being raped.

As for whether anyone has the "right to show displeasure" - anyone has the right to show or express displeasure.  If we were to go by this rule, then no one in a marriage would ever be allowed to express negative feelings about their sex life, no one would ever be allowed to talk about being dissatisfied and wanting something more, something different, something less, whatever.

It's one thing to recognize poor behaviour.  It's another thing to equate being an insensitive jackass with being a rapist.

"And it is emotional blackmail, and more than a man just being an insensitive jackass. It goes right to the heart of men thinking they should have it if they want it, no matter what."

No doubt it is, in many cases.  But there's been situations where I was anticipating sexual activity, only to have something happen where it just wasn't possible. Certainly,  I'm dissapointed. That dissapointment, which I think was shared in those situations with my partner, certainly showed itself in one behavior or another, even if it was just a sigh.

Or so I say.  Only I really know.  And, maybe I don't even know what I really know.

What I'm getting at is we are making assumptions about what the other person is thinking.

To not consider them is to lump them in with the rapists.  Isn't that a good enough reason to consider them?  Especially when there don't appear to be any actual statistics to back up the idea that the number of men who are disappointed, as Tommy was, but not rapists, is "statistically small"?  Short of reading minds, what's the methodology for those stats, anyway?  How do researchers differentiate between someone who's showing their disappointment, and someone who's hinting that violence is next?

Michelle, I tended to agree with your common sense approach to this discussion until now but... when you write "if the woman consents when she could have said no without dire consequences (e.g. being physically abused, having the children be physically abused, being blackmailed), then I don't think it's the same as rape or sexual assault", I have to say that courts have recognized that consent under duress - EVEN without as dire consequences as the ones you list - isn't consent and that jusdgment calls are authorized as to when a situation becomes, yes, sexual abuse.

This discussion certainly throws the liberal notion of "consenting" adults for a long-awaited loop! Thanks for the quotes, remind: these perspectives and analyses have to be taken into account at some point, even if the justice system and male society in general are still pretty much dead-set against that.

P.S.: Don't berate assholes - we'd all be full of it and explode without 'em!

Very relevant and practical discussion.

I can relate to the idea of giving into sex because i felt like thats the only way he would desire me and not leave me. Many times, i also feel that i enjoy affection, hugging and all that, but most men always want to take that to "another new level", and they don't understand that showing affection and kissing or cuddling does not mean i want to have sex. And it's hard to say no because i didn't want to hurt his feelings or i felt like I owe him some sexual pleasure for being "so nice" to me. Low self esteem is a big issue, and social expectation of men and women is a big issue, but sometimes the low self esteem is due to the socialization of men and women and the culture we live in...so i think a social change is always necessary for these things to stop happening so often..

It's really up to the woman to not give into sex when receiving the "disappointment" look, we can't treat men like children. Like mother offering their children candies when they are crying or upset.

There's an expectation, certainly in a relationship or even more, in a marriage, for me, that i should offer sex on some regular basis, although i shouldn't "have to", but it is "expected" that the relationship "would not last" if i don't give it.

There's alot of internalization involves, sometimes, the men dont even have to say anything or do anything.

For example: okay, i don't have to have sex whenever he wants it, but if i choose to reject him this saturday, well, next saturday, i probaby should have to, not because i am scared he will hurt me, but because this is the "expectation" of a "relationship", becuase my internalization is that, u know, what kind of a girlfriend would i be, if i never put out?

That's how i think, i don't know what other women think..

I think it also depends on the couple.  I know I have been in relationships where he has pouted when I have not been in the mood but I knew him and I trusted him so I knew he was merely expressing his disapointment not trying to passively agressively change my behaviour.

For me personally I can't comment on if someone is pressuring me into sex in this way constitues rape or just abuse because if I sensed that someone was trying to control me in any way I am out.  Can't control me if I am not there.  So I don't have any experience with men as boyfriends / husbands who are emitting behaviours that are trying to manipulate me into sex because it never gets far enough for me to feel comfortable with having sex with them and don't know what I would consider it.

I do have a lot of experience with men who loved having sex with me and were sorely disapointed when they were not able to because of various reasons.  They knew me well enough to know if they showed their disapointment I would not take it as a manipulation but would take it for what it was, their display of disapointment.

I think that if a man knows that this is an issue for a woman (and it is an issue for a lot of women just based on the known statistic of 1 of 6 women suffering from sexual assault or sexual abuse) that if they were to use this to coerse women into having sex it may in fact constitue rape because of the known issues of fear that is associated with sex for that woman, no matter if it is withdrawl of affection, refusing to talk to them or actual threats.

However if it is not an issue (the actual sex act) and they were to use the same tactics within an unhealthy relationship it may just constitue abuse or be another way in which the abuse in the relationship is displayed.

I think intent is everything.  In one case the intent is to violate the woman sexually, in another it is to make the woman feel a certain way (with or without the sex act) and in the other it is merely a display of disapointment, a healthy communication within the couple that lets the woman know I still want to be close to you.

"Okay, I don't care", in these terms, does seem to be rather negative when there is the expectation of a continuing relationship (but without sex right now). I can think of a number of reactions that would show more affection...

Maybe the problem here is that we have progressively ratcheted down the matter being discussed from very abusive behaviour - not only pouting but yelling, slamming the door, the silent treatment, waking up children, threatening to go have sex elsewhere, etc. - to a mere "expression of disappointment". I think the former behaviour is certainly abusive, but it seems a bit disingenuous to equate such a power play with a mere "expression of disappointment".

Many relationships, even between the most enlightened or 'progressive' couples may experience from time to time coersive situations such as pouting, the silent treatment, even passive aggressiveness, in dealing with a myriad of inter-relationship dynamics that do not involve sex.  There is a difference though when these techniques are used to compel a person to give themselves over to the sexual satisfaction of another.  It's obvious to imagine, even for those of us not normally found on the receiving end, that this could occur within relationships at all levels of the social strata, where women exist in traditional domestic environments, or well educated professionals, or juggling somewhere in between.  What occurs in either instance is that the individual is reduced through pressure into becoming the on demand sexual prop, just something to ejaculate into, regardless of their individuality, preferences, needs, and status in life.  It's a complete betrayal of whatever it is that brings individuals together, where love, respect, and caring were promised, in it's place sexual servitude becomes the true reality.  The accustomed dominance is it's own excuse, the justification being that men will be men, boys will be boys, and that is what we do, we can't help being anything other than what we are.  We've managed to convince many women, along with ourselves.  It's no wonder that women expect this and in many cases accept our nature, because emotionally, it must be far easier to deal with than to fully realize the tragedy for what it is.

Everything I have read here on this issue has some validity. I find the last post by slumberjack particularily insightful.

Sexual coercion exists on many different levels. The coercion that is recognized to exist between people who hold control or power over others, such as doctors, lawyers, preists, rabbis, etc has not been touched on here. This may be a completely different facet to this multi-faceted subject, but I think it should at least be raised if we are to explore this topic fully.

Doctors and clergy have the ability to manipulate those who come to them for help. Unfortunately there are many examples where such professionals have manipulated people for their own sexual gratification.

I think in this area the law is behind the times in its ability to deal with this type of coercion. Civil suits many times, are the only course of action available to those who have been violated through such relationships.

I think the courts should view this matter from a criminal point of view as well.

Just something I wanted to add.

Now, I wrote that last post just before reading remind's most recent longer post.  And I definitely agree with it, so I think we're on the same page and maybe just stating it differently.  I also agree that it would be a good thing to say to a guy who is pressuring you to have sex after you've already told him you're not in the mood,

"Say we have sex right now.  You know I don't want to have sex.  You know that if I say yes it's because you're giving me a hard time and pressuring me into it.  What do YOU call having sex with a woman when you know all the way along while you're doing it that she doesn't want to?  Say we have sex right now.  You know I'm not into it.  You know I'm hating it, AND I'm feeling resentful that I've been pressured into doing it.  You're really going to enjoy that?  That's really fun for you, to fuck me when you know I don't want you to?"

"give in"???

too personal

bad idea

I don't know what just happened here since I didn't see any posts before LTJ deleted them, but I have the feeling that this might be an example of the danger of broadening the definition of rape too much, to include people who are expressing dissatisfaction to their partners about their sex lives or the frequency of sex.  People have to be able to talk about this stuff - even express their feelings about this stuff, even if we don't like their feelings.  Telling your partner how you feel is not the same thing as trying to force her to have sex.

That'll have to be a rhetorical question because I'm going to close this for length. :)