The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Is "accidental penetration" rape?

Scroll to see replies

Hahahahaaaaaaa omg you speaking from experience OP?

Clearly not! There is no scenario where you slip into someone's vagina and have sex with them and they don't notice, unless they're drugged or dead. Either way that would be rape (or necrophilia if she's dead) if she had not known/could not give consent.
Original post by porn induced coma
Also, it's not an accident if you carry on doing it.


Nail on the head.

Posted from TSR Mobile
There was nothing accidental about that penetration, thats plain rape
Original post by WoodyMKC
Who TF does that :rofl:


You'd be surprised...a few months ago a girl on her period made me tease her but I very strictly was not allowed to penatrate. I thought hmm..its a take it or leave it situation..maybe i can get her turned on enough to let dip the mushroom tip...

Slightly off topic, but its weird that some girls on their period use that as an excuse to not engage in sexual activity whatsoever? Your period doesnt stop you from giving me head. And ermm...anal..
Original post by 999tigger


looks like those are in the woman's sleep though... I can believe you might not wake up if someone had sex with you but the idea someone penetrating you while you're awake and aware would go unnoticed is bizarre... obviously should that happen it would be rape (if the woman said no penetration then you really need to be checking the situation has changed, not slipping it in and assuming she'd say stop)
Original post by Anonymous
To make this short, I'll bullet point this situation..

1. A man and woman are in bed, kissing and such.
2. The girl made it VERY clear she did not want to have sex with the man
3. She however, agreed to him rubbing his penis on her vagina
4. They do that, but at some point, it slips inside and the man does not stop having sex...
5. The woman is unaware that it slipped inside but is informed by the man, after he ejaculates, that he did penetrate her.

IS THIS RAPE? What are your thoughts?


There's a crucial piece of info missing. Did he realise he was penetrating her? 4. says he doesn't stop but it doesn't specify he knew he was inside her. Maybe he only realised he was penetrating after ejaculation, in which case, the waters are muddied as it were.
Original post by Anonymous
To make this short, I'll bullet point this situation..

1. A man and woman are in bed, kissing and such.
2. The girl made it VERY clear she did not want to have sex with the man
3. She however, agreed to him rubbing his penis on her vagina
4. They do that, but at some point, it slips inside and the man does not stop having sex...
5. The woman is unaware that it slipped inside but is informed by the man, after he ejaculates, that he did penetrate her.

IS THIS RAPE? What are your thoughts?


I wouldn't consider it rape because technically rubbing a penis against your vagina is a sexual act. It's an accident waiting to happen if you did not want sex.
Original post by doodle_333
looks like those are in the woman's sleep though... I can believe you might not wake up if someone had sex with you but the idea someone penetrating you while you're awake and aware would go unnoticed is bizarre... obviously should that happen it would be rape (if the woman said no penetration then you really need to be checking the situation has changed, not slipping it in and assuming she'd say stop)


Its a propblem scenario, so soemtimes they are contrived. You have to accept it as it is.
Original post by sleepysnooze
where is "continued" penetration in the case law that I referred to though?


Look at the Sexual Offences Act 2003, where it's extremely clear.
Original post by sleepysnooze
where is "continued" penetration in the case law that I referred to though? if it doesn't apply to the OP (which I didn't read all of) then...then why are you saying this about the possibility of my case law not applying? did *you* not read all of the opening post as well?


What is the case you are referring to? Give us the case reference.
Do you think you understand all the elements that are required for the crime of rape as stated in the SOA? Which part do you think is absent in the OP's scenario?
Original post by unprinted
Look at the Sexual Offences Act 2003, where it's extremely clear.


I said case law, not statute
Original post by porn induced coma
Yes. Because she clearly stated her boundaries. Agreeing to sexual contact is not the same as agreeing that anything goes. If I agree to vaginal penetration does not mean I agree to oral or anal penetration.

Also, it's not an accident if you carry on doing it.

Finally, I'm also pretty sure you can tell when it's in so that bit confuses me.

I assume this scenario is not factual.


It's possible he carried on because he thought she changed her mind. She initially said she didn't want him to be insider her, but after accidental penetration, she didn't say or do anything. From his perspective, it would have seemed like she was okay with it (which may be why he didn't stop). From her perspective, well, I have no idea how she was unaware of him being insider her (I'm also confused). Which would lead me (and a court) to believe she likely did know, but chose not to correct the situation for some reason.

Rape is an abhorent crime. This? It really doesn't seem like it. While an argument could be made that he technically penetrated her without consent (although this is hard to prove - not all consent is verbal - but she did say no earlier on), the whole thing isn't really in the 'spirit' of rape, if you know what I mean. And it just sounds a little weird.
(edited 7 years ago)
a) that would never happen
b) yes
Original post by sleepysnooze
I said case law, not statute


I refer you to my opening sentence.
:colonhash:

Spoiler

(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Yes it is definite rape; there's evidentially no consent mentioned in this passage regarding penetration - the man should've stopped.


Original post by _gcx
Yes.


Original post by doodle_333
slipping in by accident would be something she'd have to have accepted in agreeing to the actions she did but him continuing would be rape

however wtf - even if a woman agreed to those terms how would she not notice a dick inside her?


Original post by Scott.
Yes.


Original post by bikiniikilll
Yes, it is rape.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Original post by 999tigger
The accidental point is not (because it requires intentional penetration), but it becomes so at at the point where he does not stop. Clearly rape as he knew she did not consent.

The sleep part is just she cant give consent, although I seem to recall some case about previously giving it as party of a sex game.


Original post by akbar0123
Yes because she said to stop and he did not


After he accidentally penetrated her, he kept on going, yes. However, she didn't say or do anything in response. To the guy, it would probably seem like she changed her mind and is now okay with penetration after all. Like many here have said, who wouldn't notice a penis inside them? Why didn't she say or do anything to rectify the situation? Was she letting him? Why?

Yes, before it happened she did say she didn't want to have penetrative sex. However, minds and feelings can change, and not all consent is verbal. To the guy, her actions could be considered a form of consent. Ultimately, however, we're not mind readers, nor do we know every detail. Which is why I would refrain from calling it rape, particularly as it doesn't quite seem to be in the 'spirit' of rape, so to speak.
Original post by Dandaman1
After he accidentally penetrated her, he kept on going, yes. However, she didn't say or do anything in response. To the guy, it would probably seem like she changed her mind and is now okay with penetration after all. Like many here have said, who wouldn't notice a penis inside them? Why didn't she say or do anything to rectify the situation? Was she letting him? Why?

Yes, before it happened she did say she didn't want to have penetrative sex. However, minds and feelings can change, and not all consent is verbal. To the guy, her actions could be considered a form of consent. Ultimately, however, we're not mind readers, nor do we know every detail. Which is why I would refrain from calling it rape, particularly as it doesn't quite seem to be in the 'spirit' of rape, so to speak.


Have some perspective. If someone was forcing themselves on a woman and penetrating them, many would be too shocked to do anything about it. "Who wouldn't notice a penis inside them" is a weak point as it's evidentially traumatising for them. It's extremely easy to tell whether someone is enjoying sex or not by their facial expression, you certainly do not need to be a mind reader to decipher it. But, even then, one simple verbal statement such as "how are you feeling" gives a more conclusive response. If she says "no" or remains silent, you can be certain you're doing something extremely unjust.

There are no excuses. This is non-consensual and consequently, it is rape.
Original post by chazwomaq
There's a crucial piece of info missing. Did he realise he was penetrating her? 4. says he doesn't stop but it doesn't specify he knew he was inside her. Maybe he only realised he was penetrating after ejaculation, in which case, the waters are muddied as it were.


4. They do that, but at some point, it slips inside and the man does not stop having sex...5. The woman is unaware that it slipped inside but is informed by the man, after he ejaculates, that he did penetrate her.


So on the ordinary meaning of the words, the does not stop having sex directly after penetrating indicates he carried on There is nothing in the scenario that indicates he wasnt inside her . The fact that he did inform her after of the penetration is confirmation he knew, which you put together with you know the only issue on consent was that he knew she had expressly not given it.
Original post by Dandaman1
It's possible he carried on because he thought she changed her mind. She initially said she didn't want him to be insider her, but after accidental penetration, she didn't say or do anything. From his perspective, it would have seemed like she was okay with it (which may be why he didn't stop). From her perspective, well, I have no idea how she was unaware of him being insider her (I'm also confused). Which would lead me (and a court) to believe she likely did know, but chose not to correct the situation for some reason.

Rape is an abhorent crime. This? It really doesn't seem like it. While an argument could be made that he technically penetrated her without consent (although this is hard to prove - not all consent is verbal - but she did say no earlier on), the whole thing isn't really in the 'spirit' of rape, if you know what I mean. And it just sounds a little weird.


The scenario is ridiculous and not worth arguing over. However, I will point out that freezing is a common reaction to a traumatic event. That is why making sure one actually has consent is good for everyone. Putting your penis inside someone and assuming it's probably fine is stupid, especially when they've already definitely said they didn't want that. Which according to the OP they did.*
(edited 7 years ago)

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you