Of course I agree that no person is obligated to have sex with their partner at any given moment, but sex is a part of romantic relationships, if you want to be in one, you’re gonna need to put out at some point. 

I don’t see a problem with women or men deciding to have sex when they don’t want to for the sake of their partner, either. Just because you don’t want sex, doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t give consent to it. 

I don’t think this post is actually intended to explain consent. I think it’s essentially an expression of dominance. “Men’s sexual needs aren’t important in a relationship, and if you think they are, then you’re a rapist. Relationships should be orientated entirely around the needs of women, and men should be grateful just to be in women’s presence.” No, men’s needs are important, especially to men, and sex is important to both men and women. In fact, not getting the quantity or quality of sex that you need from a relationship can end that relationship.

I don’t agree that ordinary people think a relationship is consent. I’ve never met anyone who thinks that way, nor have I ever seen a piece of methodologically sound research demonstrating that this mentality is common within any culture. At this point, I suspect that the idea is totally fabricated.

You just fucking quoted me something that says IT IS NOT LEGALLY POSSIBLE FOR A HUSBAND TO RAPE HIS WIFE and tried to tell me that it actually means the opposite. You call me intellectually dishonest but did I fucking say that a man can just bash around his wife? No. I said RAPE. It was illegal to hurt her during the rape, the rape itself was not illegal. 

And I’m aware its not the reverse. Because in the UK men cannot be raped by women because they have no penis - male victims didn’t come into the equation. That’s why I was one of the people who campaigned to the government to have it changed. But that’s not the topic and you know it.

Because the case analysis ends like this: “ Held, (1) the accused could not be guilty of the crime of rape; (2) the second count was a valid one and must be left to the jury for their decision; (3) if a person was caused hurt or injury resulting, not in any physical injury, but in an injury to her state of mind for the time being, that was within the definition of actual bodily harm.”

The rape was legal. The ABH was not. You get punished for the ABH resulting from the rape, not the rape itself. Try lying to someone who hasn’t studied criminal law next time.

… but only if they’re dating someone of the same sex!’