I’m just going to quote at length:
My very best vagina friend sleeps in quite late. In the hours I’ve spent lying next to her staring at the wet spot she’s unknowingly making I have become fascinated with her morning arousal. Sometimes she’ll cover her vag with her hands in her sleep because she knows I’ll try to play with it.
Oh look! She’s trying to pretend she has bodily autonomy from his desires! How adorable!
Maybe if she’s trying to stop you from playing with it, she doesn’t want you to play with it?
This is going to sound quite rapey, but this morning wetness leaves women in an unusually vulnerable state. They’re sedated with sleep and last night’s scotch with a vagina as moist as a towelette. I could plop myself on top and fuck her for a whole minute before she even wakes up and knows what’s happening.
It does sound quite rapey, doesn’t it?
Crawl under the sheets and start licking while your woman is still sleeping. She’ll slowly wake up and be confused, but happy because it is scientifically impossible for a women to be annoyed while there’s a tongue on their clit.
So what level of sexual entitlement is it to believe your sexuality is always wanted?
Here’s the original.
- What will Dior’s decision regarding Johnny Depp mean for male survivors? - August 10, 2022
- Chauvin Released, Teen bullied for supporting trump, False accuser forced to apologize| HBR News 277.5 - October 13, 2020
- What Jordan Peterson checking into Rehab can teach us all - October 26, 2019
To be completely frank, I never had a problem with being woken up like that.
Not that I was in a position to complain, as I used to wake her up in the middle of the night in a similar fashion myself.
As long as your partner has said it’s fine it’s fine in my opinion.
This: “Sometimes she’ll cover her vag with her hands in her sleep because she knows I’ll try to play with it.” Suggests that wasn’t the case here.
I’m a bit too prudish to comment much (other than to say, yes, sexual entitlement) but that whole vice site is a good collection of crap that I can use as evidence as to why I really don’t like the typical 20 something year old woman. When women have no pussy power over you (but they think they do), they look like juvenile trash. I guess it was my mistake to actually look through some of that site’s content. To mimic a meme, “ladies, don’t do that.”
ohm my good that is awful…..
I hope the bastions of truth, justice and equality ™ Hugo Schwyzer, Amanda Marcotte and David Futrelle get that taken down…..
ooooops, I went to the original link and now I see it is a penis owner who was “raped.”
Well, now, unless a man has status and power, we all know his only value is to die in wars, work dangerous jobs and sink on the titanic…..
oooopsie, looks like what we thought was just a good place to discuss masculinity is another terrible place with tips on how to get away with nonconsensual envelopment…..
quick someone write Tom Matlock and tell him he is not a Good Man for publishing this nor is Hugo Schwyzer…..
anyways as far as the morning sex thing…..
it would be okay if the partner would ask-how would you feel about x,y,z happening? Good, one of these mornings you will get a surprise…..
I was not ok with that. It is not hard to have a talk with one’s partner and ask whether it would be ok to wake them _with_ sex (as opposed wake them up for sex).
It’s not just rapey, it actually is rape by law where I live. The current law is gender neutral and states that having sex with a partner that is unable to consent is rape and is punishable as such. I’ve seen rape laws from several US states which also would classify this as rape
The footnotes clarify that being asleep or otherwise unconscious is being unable to consent.
This article seem to be from Australia/New Zealand.
In NZ they like UK uses the old common law definition of rape – that is that one needs a penis to rape. I think they call it sexual violation when it’s woman on man. The pertinent part is this though:
Article 128A Allowing sexual activity does not amount to consent in some circumstances
(3) A person does not consent to sexual activity if the activity occurs while he or she is asleep or unconscious.
Many women have this idea that raping a man is no problem because it isn’t rape if the victim post-facto consents and as everyone “knows”; men always consents to sex (it’s scientifically impossible for them to not consent to a blow-job).
That link seems to be infected with the Phoenix Exploit Kit, and my AVG blocked it. I’d recommend everyone that follows your link, run a security scan and/or make sure they have a web protection option enabled. I alerted Lisa at GMP that the site seems to be infected.
My girlfriend is an early riser so she does this sometimes. And I often tell her to cut it out because I am a sleepyhead and find it extremely unpleasant to be woken up so abruptly. Sometimes I get a terrible headache if I haven’t had a good early morning sleep.
I figured I’d run an experiment.
I’ll turn all of the ‘mra’ articles on this site into feminist ones simply by reversing the gender. Cause if I was talking about women having these problems, feminists would care.
But because it happens to men and isn’t consistent with their ideology…
 These issues would piss me off whether or not they were happening to women or men.
here’s the Stoner With a Boner critique for y’all….
and from the OG article:
“Men can’t say no to head, they just can’t. I guarantee every guy you know has gotten a BJ from a questionable fat chick at some point; once you put a penis in a mouth there’s just no turning back.”
How condescending of this bigot to automatically think that a BJ is my fav sex act. I’ll even go as far as to say that allowing someone’s teeth near your dear privates takes a great deal of trust….
Also, as far as the “questionable fat chick”-nope not me. Possibly (at least hypothetically) an “unconventional beauty” or three-but I’m not a PUA so I won’t bore y’all with the gory details. Maybe a “questionable fat chick” or three who thinks I’m a misogynistic @$$hole for not approaching or popping a boner for them though….
I don’t know if TGMP is infested with computer viruses, according to my software all is good on my system but who really knows….
Still, viruses or not that place if frikkin’ toxic….
SWAB: You know, I don’t know what qualifications Joanne at GMP has to be a “relationship expert” (other than apparently she has a degree in Women’s Studies or Gender Studies -same thing I know) but she has given some really shitty advice before too.
in this article: http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/my-wife-wants-to-have-a-threesome/# she tells the letter writer that he and his wife should make it clear to the third person in a threesome that she is only there to “service them sexually.”
As to the topic at hand, I heartily approve of flipping women’s words around and showing how entitled and douchey they sound coming out of the mouth of men (and thus proving that they should sound just as entitled and douchey coming from the mouth of a woman.)
And I’m utterly sick of this trope of “it’s different when we do it” and screaming about Context! when women engage in behavior that they skewer men for. (like objectifying male athletes at the olympics http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/06/olympic-body-ogling-different-women)
I do find it interesting that she was able to write “this might sound rapey but…” and then went along and wrote it (and did the action) anyway. That shows not ignorance, but complete -and possibly callous- indifference. Wow.
“And I’m utterly sick of this trope of “it’s different when we do it” and screaming about Context! when women engage in behavior that they skewer men for. (like objectifying male athletes at the olympics ‘
That is a totally common use of the privilege scam. “It’s totally different when X “marginalized person” does it!!!”
““Men can’t say no to head, they just can’t. I guarantee every guy you know has gotten a BJ from a questionable fat chick at some point; once you put a penis in a mouth there’s just no turning back.”
I’m a man. A woman anywhere around my dick is an immediate boner-killer. Eeeeeeeewwwww………..
“..I really don’t like the typical 20 something year old woman. ”
… 20-something *white* women. This is what we get after a genration of you go girl. They all think they are God’s gift to the whole damned planet.
I remember an article and comment thread on one of our weeklies here in Seattle, where the issue was that Asian men couldn’t get white girlfriends while Asian woen could get white boyfriends. The comments wee a wonderland of cluelessmness and wrong assumptions. It was all due to patriarchy and racism you understnad. WOCs oculd get white boyfriends because that was a subordnate position, so of course Asian men could never aspire, etc…
While all the time, it really was about racism and patriarchy, but nothing like these peopel imagined. Of course Asian would avoid dating white women if they were serious about a relationship. White woemn were not marriage material. Period. meanwhile daughters could marry who they wanted because it didn’t matter; they were the one with the repsonsibility of continuing the family. Hell, there was atime the Chinese traded princesses ot the Huns in peace treaties.
But the unquestioned assumption underlying all of that thread wa sthat getting the white girl was the obvious objective of every successful man.
I would like to challenge the notion, that waking somebody up with sex, without explicit approval of the slepig partner, is ncessarily rape. Though I understand that technically it is sex without consent, hence rape, I think things are more complicated here.
First let me tell what I agree with:
Ignoring your partners “no” like in
“Sometimes she’ll cover her vag with her hands in her sleep because she knows I’ll try to play with it.”
is awful, as is the refusal to acknowledge, that your partner might not want sex:
“because it is scientifically impossible for a women to be annoyed while there’s a tongue on their clit.”
and i will not try to defend this. Further I agree, that having intercourse with someone asleep goes very far and is reckless.
Now to my disagreement: While engaging in any form of mting behaviour many people allow and even wish for small boundary violations, like kissing without asking. As long as it is well intentioned and the acting person had good reason to believe, that their come-ons might be welcome, many people would excuse boundary violations. To apply this to this example, let us say I lay next to a sleeping girls I have a sexual relationship with. Let us further assume we haven’t talked about what I may do to her while she is asleep. Waking her by touching her arm or shoulder is obviously OK. What about snuggling against her and touching her stomach with my arm, while my erections touches her back side? I don’t have explicit consent, so is this sexual assault?
One could say so, but i believe most people would find this idea ridiculous and vilifying of them and their partners. What if through our history of waking up in one bed, it is established that it is OK to snuggle and caress the partners stomach, and know I give her a kiss on the neck, or caress her thighs or her brests? Is this sexual assault? Where is the line, in cases of absence of explicit consent? One can draw the line at genital stimulation, but as one can make people very aroused without touching their genitals this line seems a bit random.
I believe, when some other acts of physical intimacy (like caressing of different body parts) while one partner is asleep were established to be OK, one can come to a situation where it seems hypocritical to call beeing waken up with sex rape.
The article specifically talked about oral sex. You did state an agreement (of sorts) with that being unacceptable. I note that you did not call initiation oral sex or intercourse with someone asleep as rape, but as something that goes very far and is reckless.
And then after a longwinded sliding-slope argument (which mind-bafflingly includes the assertion that the boundary between caressing other body parts and genital stimulation seem random!) you state that you believe that “when some other acts of physical intimacy (like caressing of different body parts) while one partner is asleep were established to be OK, one can come to a situation where it seems hypocritical to call being waken up with sex rape.”
You didn’t supply a definition of sex, so I will state what I’ll use: Sex: intercourse, oral sex, genital stimulation by hand (such as handjobs and fingering and so on) and anal stimulation/penetration.
Ok, John wakes up her wife with some spooning, kisses on her neck and some caressing along her body – including breast and thighs. She does not protest and it is established by that that she’s OK with that. One morning John slips two fingers inside his wife’s vagina while she’s still asleep. She wakes up and is livid and an argument ensues and the wife points out that what John did in fact constitutes rape. John calls her a hypocrite since she didn’t protests him kissing and caressing her breast and thighs the other morning.
It’s the initiation’s responsibility to ensure consent and to do their due diligency when doing so. Assuming consent does not do any (direct) harm when the assumption is correct. (“She was ok with me fondling her breast while she slept yesterday so she’ll be ok with me rubbing her clit while she sleeps” is making an assumption is it not?) If the assumption is wrong then both are up shit creek: She because she was violated and hurt and you because you hurt someone you presumably care very much about. This will then impact the relationship.
Avoiding making that assumption is dead easy in the scenario we’re talking about here: Either obtain consent in advance. Or wake her up before sexytime – you do want her to experience it as well?
As a proprietor of a free will one of course can chose to make the assumption that your partner will be ok with it and act accordingly. Implying that the partner in any way or form would be hypocrites if they turn out not to be ok with it is beyond pale.
That is how your comment came across.
“Implying that the partner in any way or form would be hypocrites if they turn out not to be ok with it is beyond pale.”
You are right, what I said was not want I wanted to say. What I meant with “hypocritical”, was incosequent, in the following sense:
-Having sex with somebody without their consent is rape.
-Snuggling against somebody without their consent is sexual assault.
-Both those sentence are of the same structure and hence logically:
If having sex with somebody asleep, without prior explicit consent, is necessarily rape, then snuggling against somebody asleep, without prior explicit consent, is sexual assault.
-I am very sure that most people wouldn’t consider snuggling against your boy- or girlfriend to be sexual assault.
I was talking about the abstract discussion, not about a concrete case.
“It’s the initiation’s responsibility to ensure consent and to do their due diligency when doing so.”
I disagree with this statement in the generality in which you stated it. A lot of mating behaviour happens without explicit consent, for example I don’t know a woman, who wants to be asked before she gets kissed. If your statement were true everyone, who just kisses somebody else, without prior explicit consent, would be guilty of a sexual assault. While you obviously can reasonably hold this view, you will never get a broad consens to your statement.
” One morning John slips two fingers inside his wife’s vagina while she’s still asleep.”
To me this seems definitely over the line, but being a cis-man I can not speak knowingly about violations of a female body. Instead I will give you an example of a boundary violation of a male body.
A.)Guy lies naked on his bed with a woman he has an ongoing sexual relationship with. Guy is occupied with reading a book. To get his attention his sex affair kisses him on his stomach, his thighs and surprisingly on his penis. Being preoccupied and surprised Guy wasn’t able to stop the kiss on his penis.
B.)Same situation as A, only instead of reading, Guy is asleep and the woman tries to wake him up by her actions.
I claim, that there is no fundamental difference between the wrongness of the woman’s doing in case A and in case B and that, while calling A sexual assault (it is oral sex without consent) is a reasonable position, only a small minority of cis-men would agree with this judgement, when asked about their bodily autonomy.
First: Can you point out to me exactly where the words “explicit consent” occur in the sentence by me you quoted? Starting low intensity and increase the sexual level of interaction while leaving your partner room for stopping/leaving/voicing non-consent and also be on the look-out for non-verbal signs of non-consent are part of what I called “due dilligence in ensuring consent”.
Secondly: The women who doesn’t want to be asked before they are kissed* all wants to be kissed. The ones who doesn’t want to be kissed would love to be asked before you kiss them so they can avoid the kiss. So your statement is only true in the unlikely scenario where every woman you know wants a kiss from you. Secondly a kiss with an awake person normally allows room for the other person to voice non-consent as they can see you moving in for the kiss and can voice a no or or use their body-language by turning their head away. If you don’t have consent then it would be unwise to move so fast in for the kiss that she doesn’t have the opportunity to stop it.
*Since we are talking about a sexual context I’ll assume we’re talking french kissing and not other form of kissing which have no sexual connotation (like kissing on the cheeks as a greeting)
WTF? You really don’t see a difference between these two scenario? The first one is a pretty straightforward implied consent case signified by a serie of sexual actions starting low with a reasonable and somewhat predictable (if your sex affair kisses you on your stomach and then on your thighs I wouldn’t describe the following kiss on the penis as surprising) increase in sexual level between them. This leaves enough room for the man to voice his non-consent if he doesn’t want to proceed any further (him reading does not preclude him noticing the discrete actions of his partner). So, no, I wouldn’t call that scenario sexual assault.
In scenario B) the man has NO options to voice any non-consent. He has no possibility to stop the woman at the point where he wants to stop. Not being able to discern between these two cases is a major failing in my view.
By the same logic then we can start from your position and re-arrange this:
-Snuggling against somebody asleep without prior consent is not sexual assault
-Having sex with somebody asleep without prior consent is not necessarily rape
(as per your argument so far)
These sentences are of the same structure and hence logically:
-Snuggling against somebody without their consent is not sexual assault
-Having sex with somebody without consent is not necessarily rape
So I can have sex with someone without in any way getting their consent and it can be not rape?
Aside from that I will just point out that noone have claimed that snuggling against someone without their consent is (always) sexual assault, although it can be in some cases (snuggling some stranger sleeping next to you on the bus and pressing your erection against them would be one example where you could end up being charged with sexual assault).
thank you for your responses, I feel like I am poking you with a stick just for the sake of argument, so I will stop this after this comment. Of course I would welcome and read if you would respond again.
“First: Can you point out to me exactly where the words “explicit consent” occur in the sentence by me you quoted?”
The words don’t appear, but the statement
“It’s the initiation’s responsibility to ensure consent…”
implies to me explicit consent, if you really want to be sure. Otherwise you can not be certain that you have consent, you are guessing; obviously usually you have a lot of clues which make your chances to guess “right” very high. To my knowledge, there is no guideline, how to get physical intimacy always right, without explicit consent. Sometimes people guess wrong and they do somnething sexual, their partner didn’t want and didn’t like. What if me and my partner are fooling around and she touches my penis, when I didn’t want her to. Is this sexual assault? I would say no, if this “move” was a small step further and she had a good reason to think, that I would like this touching. Now I claim that it is not really clear what constitues a “small step” (like when can you touch somebodies genitals) and what constitues a “good reason”. As an active partner it seems obviously wise, to be cautious not to harm your partner, but having been in the position of the receptive partner, I think it is unfair to require my partner to guess and to master the walk on a thin line, between “you are a boring lover” and “you sexually assaulted me”. People make mistakes and there is a huge difference between somebody disregarding my boundaries and somebody well intentioned accidentally overstepping them.
“if your sex affair kisses you on your stomach and then on your thighs I wouldn’t describe the following kiss on the penis as surprising”
But it was surprising in my hypothetical example. If you change my example, of course you will come to different conclusions.
So to make my point, let us change this example slightly.
A)Guy lies naked on the bed with a woman, he has a sex affair with (this affair includes oral sex). Guy reads and to get his attention the woman kisses him on his penis, out of the blue.
B)Same as A, but instead of reading Guy is asleep.
Does A ( B ) constitue a sexual assault?
I would say no. Though I get that depending on Guy the woman’s action can be considered reckless, respectless, a mistake or no big deal, I don’t think it is a sexual assault, which is a criminal offense.
“-Snuggling against somebody without their consent is not sexual assault
-Having sex with somebody without consent is not necessarily rape
So I can have sex with someone without in any way getting their consent and it can be not rape? “
I actually agree with the first two sntences, as long as acts like kissing a penis (once) are considered (oral) sex. Concerning the third sentence, it depends on what kind of sex we are talking about, see the prior sentence.
In general I don’t think that small boundary violations which are well intentioned and made in good faith, should be called sexual assault. What is considered small is up for debate and sibjective (for example Joanna from TGMP, seems to have quite loose standards for the boundaries of men, mine standards, while stricter then Joanna’s, seem significantly looser then yours and you seem to be very cautious). Furthermore you draw a line between genital stimulation and the stimulation of other erogenous zones, which I get on an abstract level, but not coming from personal experience.
Again you overlooked the “due dilligence” part. If you look at the complete sentence what it means is that the initiator must take every reasonable precaution. As I stated in my previous comment taking small steps and leaving room for the passive part to stop seem to be reasonable to me. While the passive partner is asleep then one of these are missing.
And herein comes the responsibility of the passive partner to be communicative and to ensure that the active part can be reasonably sure that they can escalate. A sleeping partner can’t communicate this hence the active partner has NO reasonable way of assuming implied consent unless some agreement have been reached in advance.
If your partner wakes you up with a blow-job and you’re happy with that then I won’t tell you what you should call it. I’d say she made a lucky guess. The law calls it rape by definition, but that really doesn’t have any practical effect since you’re not going to press charges. If you liked it very much and would like to repeat the experience it would be a smart thing to tell her to feel free to do it again some other time.
I am not arguing to dictate what the passive/sleeping part should feel about it or call it, but I argue for the right of the passive/sleeping partner to call it rape if that is how they feel about the situation.
However, if you penetrate your partner (with an object, digits or penis) while she is asleep (without prior explicit consent) and she wakes up and is not OK with it and feels violated and she accuses you of raping her I would say that she is within her right to do so and that it in fact was rape. Simply for the one single reason: There was NO way of her to stop it.
The longer a relationship as lasted the better the partners normally know each other and the better their “guess” would probably be. But sex with a sleeping partner and “out of the blue” sexual genital contact does carry a risk if that guess is wrong. If your partner unbeknownst to you were sexually abused by a baby-sitter who used to come in and start sex with them while they were sleeping and while they woke up then the experience of being woken with sex can have a very negative impact. They will feel raped and you feeling that it was just a bit of recklessness from your part will not change that, in fact I bet that putting forth that argument will do nothing else than appear like an attempt to minimize their reaction and thus further victimize them.
That is not an abstract line, that is a line which is well established as per the second and third base metaphors. Touch your co-worker on her neck (one erogenous zone) or touch her between her legs and see if the line is abstract.
Joanna does not necessarily have such a loose standard as you imply for men as per her clarification. She stated that she wrote and meant to wake the man up FOR sex and NOT that one should wake him up WITH sex. She muddled her first statement with the line “don’t ask, just do it” and since one normally don’t ask to wake anyone up, but one tend to ask (verbally or non-verbally) if one wants sex there was a (in my eyes) reasonable assumption that the (don’t ask, just do it) applied to the sex part and not the wake part.
She later clarified that she meant that one should just wake up the man and _then_ initiate sex (which would, you know, leave room for the man to stop). Typhonblue questioned whether that explanation was true and not just a way of denying what one initially meant. Regardless, it is pretty clear from Joanna’s clarifications that she at least now does not advocate that one can/should have sex with your partner while they are askeep (waking them up with sex), but rather that you should feel free to wake them up and then initate sex with them when they have woken up (and can say no).
Due dilligence in criminal law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_dilligence#Criminal_law
while in practice, in case I am the awake partner, I agree with your position insofar as I too see genital stimulation of my sleeping partner, without prior consent, as too risky and wrong, I would like to add two things and ask one.
If a guy wakes up his girlfriend by fondling her butt or her brests, without having prior consent to this activity, do you support her right to call it sexual assault? If no, why? If yes, where is the line?
“Joanna does not necessarily have such a loose standard as you imply for men as per her clarification.”
First let me make clear, that I wasn’t talking about what Joanna thinks or how she lives her life, I don’t know those things and don’t care about them, I was referring to her advice in the mentioned column. After reading her later clarification I partially agree with you, but
1.the expression “waking up for sex” is problematic on itself, because what when you wake up the guy and he doesn’t want sex.
2.If “waking up for sex” means just waking up and propositiong sex, then the sentence: “Don’t ask just do it” doesn’t make sense (to most people), as in most ongoing sexul relationships you just do those two things and don’t ask if you can do them.
3.The only possible interpretation I see is “waking up by making a move on the sleeping partner”.
4.Joanna clarifies indeed, what kind of “move” she ment:
“As Jill said, I was thinking more along the lines of a sexy kiss to the earlobe, not a hand on the Johnson. “
but then she adds something really strange:
“Though my particular guy would prefer the hand-to-Johnson method of waking, every guy is different.”
The problem with this sentence is, how does she know what the guy “prefers”. Well, don’t ask him, just do it, and of course fro the first of Joanna’s clarification:
“This particular answer was aimed directly at the questioner who is in a long-term relationship and lives with her boyfriend. Eli and I assume that she knows his history and particular sensitivities and hope she uses her best judgment when deciding whether to wake him up or not.”
It’s the woman’s judgement and because of the “don’t ask”-policy, it is not at all clear, that the “particular sensitivities” she knows of, include sensitivities about how he doesn’t want to be woken up.
5.The sentence “I…hope she uses her best judgment when deciding whether to wake him up or not.” sounds ridiculous if you forget, that it is not about “waking him up”, but about “waking him up for sex”, once awake he will have sex.
“Again you overlooked the “due dilligence” part.”
No I didn’t. It is about the sentence:
“It’s the initiation’s responsibility to ensure consent and to do their due diligency when doing so.”
The sentence consists of two parts joined together by an “and”, so the requirements of this sentence aren’t met, if the requirements of the first part aren’t met. But I would even argue that by escalating sexually without asking for explicit consent, one doesn’t meet the requirements of due dilligence, as they are defined in the link of Wikipedia. I quote from this link:
“…the defendant must prove on balance that they did everything possible to prevent the act from happening.” Asking for explicit consent is certanly possible.
I’m really sorry for the long comment.
Again you quote selectively: