QuoteNorth Carolina is the one state where the law explicitly says you cannot revoke consent once it's given. A bill that would remove this "unacceptable loophole" has little traction.
One May evening in 1977, Beverly Hester was sexually assaulted. According to the summary included in the North Carolina Supreme Court decision State v. Way, she testified that the perpetrator, Donnie Way, threatened to beat her if she didn't have sex with him while hanging out at a friend's apartment. When she tried to leave the bedroom, he allegedly slapped her in the face.
Hester went on to tell the court that Way penetrated her anally and forced her to perform oral sex on him. She said he began having intercourse with her?though she begged him not to because she was a virgin?but stopped when she complained of severe stomach pains. Later, at the hospital, she told her mother she was raped.
Despite her testimony, the jury appeared to be swayed by the defense's argument that Hester initially agreed to have sex with Way. During deliberations, they returned to ask the judge "whether consent can be withdrawn." The judge noted that it could, especially in cases where intercourse has turned violent and thus "no longer consensual." Way was convicted of second degree rape.
Read more: A Convicted Child Molester Just Moved in Next Door to His Victim
The state Supreme Court, however, disagreed with the lower court's interpretation of withdrawn consent. "If the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman's consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions," the High Court wrote.
As a result, for the past 38 years, women in North Carolina?like 19-year-old Aaliyah Palmer, who allegedly agreed to have sex with a man at a party but changed her mind when he got violent?have been unable to legally revoke consent after sexual intercourse begins. "It's really stupid," Palmer recently told the Fayetteville Observer. "If I tell you no and you kept going, that's rape."
On March 30, state Sen. Jeff Jackson, a Democrat, filed a bill that would change this horrific law. (He filed a similar bill with two Republican co-sponsors in 2015.) The text of SB 553 is short and to the point, reading, in part: "a person may withdraw consent to engage in vaginal intercourse in the middle of the intercourse, even if the actual penetration is accomplished with consent and even if there is only one act of vaginal intercourse."
Women in North Carolina have been unable to legally revoke consent after sexual intercourse begins.
Currently, the bill sits in the Senate's Rules Committee, where it is likely to be tabled. Jackson tells Broadly he plans to refile the bill again next year. "This really shouldn't be a controversial matter," he says. "North Carolina is the only state in the country where no doesn't really mean no. Right now, if a woman tells a man to stop having sex he is under no legal obligation to do so, as long as she initially consented. If sex turns violent, the woman has no right to tell the man he must stop."
Jackson says he first encountered this loophole when he worked as a criminal prosecutor, when his office was forced to dismiss a rape charge because of these circumstances. "Very few legislators are aware that this is the current state of our law," he says. "They're very surprised when I tell them. Most of my conversations have been educating our members about this plainly unacceptable loophole in our rape law. I have not had any members defend the loophole. Every legislator I've spoken to agrees we need to fix this."
But traction has been slow in getting this change implemented. He points to one conservative blog as an example for why. In it, the writer ridicules Jackson's work to address the "'rules' of fornication" as "pandering to the Wimmen's Studies Department alumni."
https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/43y99g/men-legally-allowed-to-finish-sex-even-if-woman-revokes-consent-nc-law-states
jesus... :uhh: :uhh:
V
So pretty much don't go anywhere that's private if you have no intentions of sex
QuoteIf the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman's consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions,"
Im paying attention to the latter part of this and its dumb but I guess instead of rape
these men (or women) just end up charged with assault, battery, etc instead of SEXUAL assualt/rape?
are those lesser crimes?
Not NC again
What a backwards ass place
Ironically, NC also has the one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the US
NC is kinda tryna come for florida
Florida is the best place on earth.
But what about a Man and a man .. asking for a friend
:ohwow:
Quote from: AYR on June 23, 2017, 12:08:48 AM
QuoteIf the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman's consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions,"
Im paying attention to the latter part of this and its dumb but I guess instead of rape
these men (or women) just end up charged with assault, battery, etc instead of SEXUAL assualt/rape?
are those lesser crimes?
I am kinda inclined to agree
You were fine with his dick inside yew
so he didn't force his way in
but if mid fuck he gets wild and your over it
its not rape its moreso assault with a deadly dick
Quote from: TEXASbama on June 23, 2017, 12:42:32 AM
But what about a Man and a man .. asking for a friend
Mee too
:kii:
Quote from: Khoi Zan on June 23, 2017, 12:51:37 AM
the south is big on manners so I guess this makes sense.
its only polite to let him cum inside of u once you said it was ok
no backsies
!!!!!!!!!!!
I mean I thought this was always a thing tho
Once you agree to let him inside you it would be rude to change your mind mid way through
I mean hmmmmmmmm
Iono how i would feel if mid way thru sex u just said oh changed my mind. I definitely wouldnt keep going tho because I'm not fighting for a nut. Im a gentleman tho :woohoo:
God bless
NO means NO though. No matter what the circumstances are.
Quote from: TheNextLew on June 23, 2017, 01:23:10 AM
Quote from: AYR on June 23, 2017, 12:08:48 AM
QuoteIf the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman's consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions,"
Im paying attention to the latter part of this and its dumb but I guess instead of rape
these men (or women) just end up charged with assault, battery, etc instead of SEXUAL assualt/rape?
are those lesser crimes?
I am kinda inclined to agree
You were fine with his dick inside yew
so he didn't force his way in
but if mid fuck he gets wild and your over it
its not rape its moreso assault with a deadly dick
:uhh:
Quote from: TheNextLew on June 23, 2017, 01:23:10 AM
Quote from: AYR on June 23, 2017, 12:08:48 AM
QuoteIf the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman's consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions,"
Im paying attention to the latter part of this and its dumb but I guess instead of rape
these men (or women) just end up charged with assault, battery, etc instead of SEXUAL assualt/rape?
are those lesser crimes?
I am kinda inclined to agree
You were fine with his dick inside yew
so he didn't force his way in
but if mid fuck he gets wild and your over it
its not rape its moreso assault with a deadly dick
:uhh: You seem like the type that would do a rape mess out. Fucking weirdo.
@
The south seems so...regressive
Most of the time you say no because they are too fucking rough. Who wants a loosey goosey. Sex is supposed to be pleasure not pain. So no if the initial act turns into some aggressive mess I'm calling rape.
Quote from: Jay. on June 23, 2017, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: TheNextLew on June 23, 2017, 01:23:10 AM
Quote from: AYR on June 23, 2017, 12:08:48 AM
QuoteIf the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman's consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions,"
Im paying attention to the latter part of this and its dumb but I guess instead of rape
these men (or women) just end up charged with assault, battery, etc instead of SEXUAL assualt/rape?
are those lesser crimes?
I am kinda inclined to agree
You were fine with his dick inside yew
so he didn't force his way in
but if mid fuck he gets wild and your over it
its not rape its moreso assault with a deadly dick
:uhh: You seem like the type that would do a rape mess out. Fucking weirdo.
Not really ive Been bottoming as of late not intew the penetration game right now
lets got get into who seems like what
thanks for your feedback jay
Quote from: Kordei Jauregui. on June 23, 2017, 02:41:46 PM
Most of the time you say no because they are too fucking rough. Who wants a loosey goosey. Sex is supposed to be pleasure not pain. So no if the initial act turns into some aggressive mess I'm calling rape.
i can understand that
but i feel
its more assault at that point i dont think its right to put the cloud of
oh he just took the bussy vs he went in consensually and things got out of hand and i wasnt feeling it
Quote from: Cho-Ku on June 23, 2017, 01:28:17 AM
Quote from: Khoi Zan on June 23, 2017, 12:51:37 AM
the south is big on manners so I guess this makes sense.
its only polite to let him cum inside of u once you said it was ok
no backsies
!!!!!!!!!!!
I mean I thought this was always a thing tho
Once you agree to let him inside you it would be rude to change your mind mid way through
!!!
It's like going out for dinner, taking your first few bites, thoroughly enjoying the flavor but then your plate gets taken back because it's not ready.
:udontlookok:
Quote from: Khoi Zan on June 23, 2017, 03:04:44 PM
wow. never saw it that way.
all ejaculations matter
:oof:
Yes they do!
(https://media.giphy.com/media/5xtDarL69LvetQy1PXi/giphy.gif)
Ch
If it ain't rough I'm telling him to stop
Quote from: Vonc2002 on June 23, 2017, 02:10:10 AM
I mean hmmmmmmmm
Iono how i would feel if mid way thru sex u just said oh changed my mind. I definitely wouldnt keep going tho because I'm not fighting for a nut. Im a gentleman tho :woohoo:
cncncncnnc u sound torn
:diddraispoot:
I'm scared
yea Vonc is a rapist
:ohwow:
:guys:
It is tricky only because evil women could use that to defame someone. I don't understand why someone would turn violent when she akready said yes and let you slide your dick in. Men like that make no sense. But as a woman if you are already mid fucking why not just finish the mess?
I do disagree with this ruling completely though.
Quote from: 1RIG on June 24, 2017, 09:29:20 AM
Quote from: Vonc2002 on June 23, 2017, 02:10:10 AM
I mean hmmmmmmmm
Iono how i would feel if mid way thru sex u just said oh changed my mind. I definitely wouldnt keep going tho because I'm not fighting for a nut. Im a gentleman tho :woohoo:
cncncncnnc u sound torn
:diddraispoot:
I'm scared
I'm not
:youready:
No still means no.
most def'
Hmm
Quote from: Tinker's Room on June 23, 2017, 12:27:29 AM
NC is kinda tryna come for florida
fag we don't have any crazy laws
Just gun crazy residents