Dear Prudence's disturbing response to marital rape

[luckylibrarian]

I was really disappointed in Emily Yoffe's response to this question in today's Dear Prudence column:

Dear Prudence,

My husband is kind, supportive, funny, generous, smart, and loving. However, I feel like I must divorce him. Six years ago, when we were in our early 20s and had just fallen in love, after a night of partying and drinking, he woke me up in the middle of the night and started to have sex with me. I was dozing and still drunk and, yes, I took my panties off myself. But when I realized that it was not OK for him to make advances on me in my state, I pushed him away and ran out. He later felt so bad he wanted turn himself in for rape. I was very confused and thought at times that I was overreacting and at others that I was raped. We painfully worked through this, but the incident made my husband very reluctant about having sex. This led to an agreement that he shouldn't be afraid of coming close to me in similar situations as long as he asked my consent. This made us feel better and I felt secure again. However, we just found ourselves in a very similar situation. After coming back from a friend’s wine tasting we went to bed and he started to kiss me. I liked it and went along, only to wake up in the morning and remember only half of it. Now I am in the same painful spot I was before and I can’t fathom how he could have ignored our agreement. Should I just drop it or am I right about feeling abused?

—Confused

Dear Confused,

I understand the need for colleges to have unambiguous codes of sexual conduct for their young, horny, possibly plastered students. These often require getting explicit permission for every escalating advance. However, if two adults are in love and have frequently made love then each can assume implicit consent to throw such legalistic caution—as well as panties—to the wind. Certainly spouses are entitled to say, “Not tonight†or “Not there,†and have such a request respected. But even a married couple who have had sex hundreds of times can enjoy that alcohol might ignite a delightful, spontaneous encounter. Your approach, however, seems to be to treat your sex life as if it is subject to regulatory review by the Department of Health and Human Services. Your prim, punctilious, punitive style has me admiring your put-upon husband’s ability to even get it up, given the possibility he’ll be accused of rape—or turn himself in for it!—if one of you fails a breathalyzer test. Living in terror that expressing one’s perfectly normal sexual desire could end one’s marriage, and freedom, is itself a form of abuse. Stop acting like a parody of a gender-studies course catalog and start acting like a loving wife. If you can’t, then give the poor sap a divorce.

—Prudie

I'm disappointed in her response. Use of alcohol and the presence of a marriage license does not give "implied consent." That's ridiculous, and the fact that the husband crossed this boundary once before makes me think that in this marriage, consent needs to be explicit.

The comments on Facebook all engage in the typical victim-blaming.

A sample:

"Sounds like the wife needs not to drink, if she is drinking to the point where she can't remember what is occuring [sic]"

"She needs to get over it, at least he is not getting it somewhere else, then she'd b complaining about that."

"Great response Emily! That letter writer sounds ridiculous. Our society has taken "consent" too far. There is a difference between violation between people who don't have sex or unconsented overly kinky sex and you are completely against it, and when you just "don't feel like it" or not remembering it due to some bubbly (wait till Alztimer's hits) when you are married and have implicit consent (voided when in a horrible argument). This should not need to be spelled out. He should divorce here so he doesn't feel like a perv or rapist every time they have fun, drunk sex. I would hate that."

And my favorite:

"see what feminism does to people? congratulations gloria allred."

Am I overreacting here? If these two were unmarried, people would be crying rape, but because she was drunk and they were married, she needs to "get over it." :o WTF?

[Deleted03]

First off I think that women's feelings should be listened to.

But the way she describes the incidents are weird. In the first one, is she ok with it and then not ok and wants to stop (and at that point stops?) or is she not ok with it, he still goes on against her wishes and then she flees? I mean the first one is not rape if everything stopped as soon as no was said, the second one is rape.

In the second incident, she does not remember if she said no afterwards? It is very weird, she clearly says that what she remembers is her saying yes and going along with it and then blacking out from the alcohol so unless her husband tells her what happened she has no recollection of anything.

Seems to me like if those situations (2 in 6 years) bothers her the only way this would work is not that he asks her consent when she is drunk and obviously blacks out sometimes from drinking, but that she withdraws all consent from having sex when she is drunk beforehand.

I don't know this is just not clearly reported and leads to a lot of confusion I think.

[ElphabaGalinda]

I just read this and her answer upset me. If you're too drunk to consent, you're too drunk to consent, regardless of if you're married or not. There is no such thing as implied consent, and I usually like Emily Yoffe, so I hate that she used that word. It does sound like the husband and wife may have a drinking problem on top of everything, but that doesn't mean anyone deserves to be raped! She could get so drunk she doesn't remember anything every night, and it still wouldn't change what happened to her and how wrong it is. If she blacks out, she can't consent. Period. The fact that she said "start acting like a loving wife" literally made me a little nauseous.

As always, the comments are even worse than the answer.

[Deleted03]

I just read this and her answer upset me. If you're too drunk to consent, you're too drunk to consent, regardless of if you're married or not. There is no such thing as implied consent, and I usually like Emily Yoffe, so I hate that she used that word. It does sound like the husband and wife may have a drinking problem on top of everything, but that doesn't mean anyone deserves to be raped! She could get so drunk she doesn't remember anything every night, and it still wouldn't change what happened to her and how wrong it is. If she blacks out, she can't consent. Period. The fact that she said "start acting like a loving wife" literally made me a little nauseous.

As always, the comments are even worse than the answer.

see in my experience blacking out just means I don't remember the next day, not that I passed out during those black out times. I know other friends like that too. But yeah if it means she passes out at the same time, it's then clearly rape.

Her answer is stupid, ask the woman to clarify and tell her to have a discussion about not having sex when you're drunk period.

[NjoyingNsanity]

I think her and her hubby need three things first a no sex if they've been drinking rule, some couples therapy, and maybe a visit to AA for her if drinking to the point where she can't clearly remember what happened the night before and it freaks her out enough to accuse her from her own admission otherwise loving hisband of rape is something that happens often. Even if she's not an alcoholic she seems to not handle being drunk well and maybe should consider not drinking, or just having one maybe two and stopping before she gets hammered. Her husband knowing her issues with being drunk and giving consent should have just put off sex until she sobbered up. I think they both have some issues that go beyond these two events. There's something off something more she's not saying maybe it's an abusive relationship, maybe one or both of the have issues with alcohol or drugs I just can't put my finger on what exactly is off. I just know staying with someone who you think might have raped you and then going and marrying them is a bit odd. You should only marry someone you absolutely trust, not someone you think might be capable of raping you. I hope there isn't more to this in the way of abuse if so she should get out and get out fast and nail the bastard to the wall legally if she can.

[luckylibrarian]

There's something off something more she's not saying maybe it's an abusive relationship, maybe one or both of the have issues with alcohol or drugs I just can't put my finger on what exactly is off. I just know staying with someone who you think might have raped you and then going and marrying them is a bit odd. You should only marry someone you absolutely trust, not someone you think might be capable of raping you.

I agree with all of this. There is something she isn't saying. She may have a problem with alcohol, though I don't think there is enough evidence to say whether she does or doesn't. Whatever the back story is, her alcohol use has no bearing on whether or not this was rape. They have issues of consent in the past that led both of them to think a rape occurred six years before. Knowing this, I don't understand how he could look at his passed out wife, know that she would be upset, and still have sex with her anyway. She wasn't in a state to consent, so it's rape.

Prudence's advice to basically "keep sweet" was ridiculous, but not totally surprising. She once told a woman whose husband slapped her once to forgive him and move on.

[Witsec7]

Maybe I'm hardcore, but I don't believe that a person under the influence of anything can offer consent. I also believe that consent can be withdrawn at any point.

There is something odd about the letter.

[ElphabaGalinda]

I agree with all of this. There is something she isn't saying. She may have a problem with alcohol, though I don't think there is enough evidence to say whether she does or doesn't. Whatever the back story is, her alcohol use has no bearing on whether or not this was rape. They have issues of consent in the past that led both of them to think a rape occurred six years before. Knowing this, I don't understand how he could look at his passed out wife, know that she would be upset, and still have sex with her anyway. She wasn't in a state to consent, so it's rape.

Prudence's advice to basically "keep sweet" was ridiculous, but not totally surprising. She once told a woman whose husband slapped her once to forgive him and move on.

I agree there's something the letter writer isn't saying, and the whole situation itself is a little strange. I personally don't get why she wanted to marry him in the first place after that, but that doesn't change what happened either. It was more Prudie's advice in general that bothered me. The whole "implied consent" and "start being a good wife" things were particularly troubling, because regardless of the particulars of this specific situation those are bad things to say.

[keeperrox]

I agree with all of this. There is something she isn't saying. She may have a problem with alcohol, though I don't think there is enough evidence to say whether she does or doesn't. Whatever the back story is, her alcohol use has no bearing on whether or not this was rape. They have issues of consent in the past that led both of them to think a rape occurred six years before. Knowing this, I don't understand how he could look at his passed out wife, know that she would be upset, and still have sex with her anyway. She wasn't in a state to consent, so it's rape.

Prudence's advice to basically "keep sweet" was ridiculous, but not totally surprising. She once told a woman whose husband slapped her once to forgive him and move on.

That's the one and only part I'm having a problem with. She explicitly said she liked what he was doing and went along with it, which to me sounds like she did give consent, but then in the morning, she could only remember half of it. That doesn't sound like she was passed out; it sounds like she had a black out. As Sophie said, to me, black out implies "awake, but can't remember" not "so drunk I fell asleep and didn't wake up while my husband was raping me". All in all, it sounds like this couple has some major issues that need to be addressed, stemming back to the incident before they were married. If she believes she was raped then, I feel sorry for her that she married him. I can't fathom not being able to trust my husband, especially sexually.

ETA: TMI Warning! My husband and I have had drunken sex many, many times, and yes, in my younger years I did drink to the point of blacking out once or twice. Not completely, but things were definitely very fuzzy from a certain point on. I certainly don't consider the sex we had when I was in that state rape, so maybe that's why I'm having trouble understanding, especially when she says she remembers liking it and going along with it.

[Kitchen Princess]

I was in a similar situation, not with someone I married, but someone I knew well. We were drinking. We went to bed. I took my clothes off and proceeded with the act, but before we could finish, and before penetration, I passed out. He did it anyway.

In no way do I think I was raped. If I had been awake, I would have had sex with him. In the 27 years since this happened, it has never, ever occurred to me that anyone would consider what he did to be rape. I was a willing participant, right up until I passed out. When I awoke, I would have had sex again with him, no problem.

I don't think this woman was raped, either.

[NjoyingNsanity]

I do wonder why if he's such a nice guy and felt so horrible about what happened the last time why in the everloving hell would he risk it and have drunk sex with her again knowing how much it upset her last time seems like a dumbass move on his part.

The advice columnist sounds like a bitch with a warped idea of what constitutes as rape spousal rape can and does happen, even if it does go under-reported and unprosecuted. If she was truly passed out then it's rape, if the details are just a bit fuzzy the next day that's called I got plastered and what the hell did I do last night it's one of the more unpleasant and embarrassing consequences of drinking till you're three sheets to the wind drunk. Still the laws on consent while drunk could see this as rape especially if she was too shitfaced to make an informed consent. If she passed out during sex after giving consent I'm not sure where the laws stands on that, but a loving husband who knows it would upset her the next day should have stopped. If he was really wasted too though the liklihood of him doing the sensible thing goes right out the window though since alcohol makes people lose thier inhibitions. I think the problem lies in how they both behave when they've been drinking and figuring out how to set boundaries for whats acceptable behavior while drunk or learning how to avoid getting that drunk to begin with.

[happy atheist]

I'm not familiar with Dear Prudence and her style. Is it possible that was supposed to mean "if you love the guy, give him the benefit of the doubt and don't assume he raped you"?

If so, she worded it poorly. She should not be saying or implying that when you're married you lose the right to say no. But I could believe she was just trying to tell the lady to not automatically assume the worst.

[smores]

There is a lot of weird behavior in that letter.

How does she know her husband remembers everything from last night - perhaps he blacked out about it too, it seems she has not even asked him about it? And she consented, but she's holding her (also likely drunk) husband responsible for all of the behavior going on last night?

I don't like the answer about implied consent, but damn, if the question hadn't left so many gaping holes I think the answer would have been a little more clear, too. I don't think I'd accuse this guy of rape and I think I'd stop drinking before I got blackout drunk, and tell my husband no drunk sex ever again. I think they both could benefit from some marriage counseling.

[synchroswimr]

I think a better answer would be to talk about marital rape and the reality of it, but in this situation to discuss it and suggest perhaps an agreement of no sex if we've been drinking.

[dawbs]

This one was confusing.

I know that I don't like 'implied consent', but I also know in long-term, committed relationships, the lines may be different for different people.

This seems like one of those tings the couple REALLY needs to discuss....because I for one like uninhibited, tipsy (or drunk) sex--I want to be able to consent to it. Which means that you have the conversation when sober and set your rules (things like "any resistance is a no if there's alcohol involved" or "things not normally on the table [pick your poison--TMI to say what ours are] are REALLY not on the table if I'm tipsy" or "the sober person needs to make sure birth-control is used").

[Austin]

Maybe I'm hardcore, but I don't believe that a person under the influence of anything can offer consent. I also believe that consent can be withdrawn at any point.

There is something odd about the letter.

I agree. There is no such thing as "implied consent". And I agree that something is off about the whole thing, perhaps more than she's saying or the like.

[Anise]

Maybe I'm hardcore, but I don't believe that a person under the influence of anything can offer consent. I also believe that consent can be withdrawn at any point.

There is something odd about the letter.

In my opinion, that idea of consent is not hardcore!

Debate over the rules of consent aside, if she feels sexually unsafe with her husband, something is wrong. She should not be told to just ignore those feelings. I agree with those saying that marital counselling is very much needed in this situation.

[Burris]

I think this situation is simply too complex for an advice columnist – and a bitchy, self-righteous advice columnist at that - to provide an appropriate answer. (This issue is a more fit topic for private counseling than for public consumption.)

Here's an embarrassing anecdote. I hesitate to share it, but I think it's appropriate here:

My husband and I have been married a long time, and we find sex most enjoyable when there's an element of humor to it – well that, and spontaneity.

One night, my husband reached over when I was sleeping, took my hand, and placed it in such a way as to suggest he was interested in...ahem...play. I was groggy, having just been woken up by what I perceived to be an advance on his part, but I was also amused and had no problem with obliging.

And then much to my horror – and no, it turns out he was not joking – he woke up and asked me what I was doing. I immediately stopped and asked if he were serious – if he'd actually been asleep. (He's by no means a sound sleeper. He moves a lot. He can be quite animated while dreaming. He also has pain at night.)

Indeed he had been unconscious, and unconscious people can't consent, obviously.

He wasn't upset. I, on the other hand, felt is if I had violated a trust. I apologized in earnest. And from then on, I've always made sure he's awake before doing anything, rather than merely assuming he is.

If alcohol had been added to the mix for both of us, it's hard to say if we could even begin to guess at whether explicit consent were or even could have been given. Knowing my husband, I can only assume that he would view the situation in a way similar to how I would view it: We’d assume the best of intentions.

While neither of us believes the marriage contract implies consent at all times, we nonetheless show a lot more leeway for this kind of thing as a committed couple than we ever would if we were single or casually dating. No still means no. Not tonight still means not tonight.

My husband took the groggy mistake I made for what it was, however, and it didn't seem to bother him.

My own view on this particular situation – and it may not be popular – is that what occurred between the couple discussed above was more of a mishap than a crime.

That said, however, she was the one there. She would know better than anyone else on the planet whether there was an element of coercion to what her husband had done. It's something she has to hash out for herself both with her husband and with a trained professional.

[keen23]

I think the main problem is that the husband knew this was an issue in the past/a trigger for his wife, but he had sex with her regardless.

I'm married. I've been having monogamous sex with my husband (and him alone) since 1995. This will sound horrible, but I've fallen asleep during sex before. It used to happen A LOT when I was pregnant- so I was stone cold sober when it would happen (pregnancy induced narcolepsy or something I guess). Never would I have considered it rape. I've passed out during drunk sex too. Because I was loaded. But up until the point where I passed out, I was totally into the sex we were having. Again, not rape. My husband used to work the PM swing shift, and would sometimes come into bed at 3 AM, and nuzzle me until I woke up (somewhat) to have sex with him. Not rape in my opinion. And my husband is the one who gets upset because I'm no longer present when we're having sex and I'm asleep/passed out/whatever- I'm good with it.

[valsa]

Maybe I'm hardcore, but I don't believe that a person under the influence of anything can offer consent. I also believe that consent can be withdrawn at any point.

If you're hardcore, we need more hardcore people around!

[emmiedahl]

I have mixed feelings. I think what he did probably falls under the category of rape, although there seems to be information missing. On the other hand, my husband and I have engaged in a lot of drunk sex and found it mutually enjoyable. I would hate to think he would ward off my advances for fear I had no means of consent and he would thus be raping me, when I am an eager participant.

It is obvious she does not feel capable of consent when she is drunk, though.

[ShesCrafty]

I agree with everyone that there is something missing from this woman's letter. The situation is strange and the fact that this has been an issue for this couple in the past...something's off. She is entitled to her feelings and the columnist's reply to "start acting like a loving wife" is ridiculous and just another way of blaming the victim.

That being said, I disagree that consumption of alcohol automatically means that a person is incapable of giving consent. I have been raped (spiked drink, passed out, woke up for about 30 seconds during the rape before passing out again) and I have had consensual sex while drunk. For me, there is definitely a difference between the two and I wouldn't like being told that I am not capable of deciding for myself if I want to have sex with someone because I've had a few drinks. Everyone is different, of course, and if someone decides for themselves that being under the influence is a barrier to consensual sex, that's fine and should be respected. I just don't think it is a blanket statement that can be applied to everyone.

[Lala29]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understood it, in the first situation, she was into it (consent) they got going, then she decided 'no' and after that it ended. To me, that is not rape, that's what should happen. Into it/participating=implied consent. But when she said no, it meant no and things stopped.

The second time, it sounds like both were drunk, she was enjoying/participating in it in the beginning, and then had a black out, which several posters have said does not mean passing out, just not remembering. To me, it seems very likely that her enjoyment/participation continued past the point of remembering. If so, how would the husband have any idea she would be uncomfortable with it? Unless they had an explicit rule about no sex while intoxicated, then it's different.

And the 'rules' for a committed relationship and dating are different. In the former, you know the person, they know you, there have been talks about stuff like this. No still means no, regardless of relationship type, but in my experience, implied consent is a lot different in the two situations. In a dating one, for me, there had to be much more clear consent (actually saying yes, for example). Married/committed relationship, not so much (a wink was enough, for example).

[mebeforee]

I agree with Burris that this is a very complicated issue, and especially difficult because we only have a short letter to go from and don't know any other details about the situation.

What it sounds like to me is that after the first incident, they almost had sex but then she changed her mind and he respected those wishes. Clearly he felt terrible for making her feel uncomfortable and scared, which makes him seem like a good person (but again, we only have what is written to go from). While the rule they put in place is a good one, and it seems to have not been a problem again until the last incident, I feel like it's a really touchy area when it comes to both of them being so drunk. She doesn't remember half of their sexual encounter, which understandably alarms her, but she may have given him her consent and forgotten it. And if he was as drunk as she was, it would also be harder for him to make the kind of responsible decisions that people here are talking about. It may have been hard for him to realize how drunk she was if he was also that intoxicated. Good judgment is difficult in those situations.

I don't think she's wrong in feeling how she does about it, but I also don't see it as a black-and-white situation in which he should have somehow been the more responsible partner, especially since she may have given him her consent at the time. I would think they ought to see a counselor to work out the situation rather than just doing the 'you should have/he should have' blaming thing.

But the response that was given to the letter and the responses to it in the comments are unacceptable to me, too. You can't just brush off the situation and say 'get over it'. That's ignorance at a destructive level. She does not OWE him sex, and if she didn't give consent or cannot remember giving consent, it is absolutely justified for her to be upset over it. The fact that people are treating this as some "feminist" issue is fucking stupid. (I put "feminist" in quotes because the ideology they think they're talking about is not actually what feminism is.)

[luckystone]

That implicit consent thing is rubbish.

I'm confused by the story. Was she conscious or not? Did she just not remember? Was she asleep or did she pass out due to alcohol? Did the husband even know? It sounded like she consented then either passed out or forgot. I don't think it's okay to keep having sex in the first scenario, but if she was aware at the time and then forgot, that doesn't sound like a problem. Except for the fact they'd already discussed it maybe? Either way I don't feel comfortable passing judgment but I agree the answer wasn't helpful.