Why marital immunity is an uphill task…
Reference:
Humphreys, T. (2007). Perceptions of sexual consent: the impact of relationship history and gender. Journal of sex research, 44(4), 307-315.
In this article, results congruent with past findings were obtained:
For any given situation, men as compared to women, found sex to be more consensual, acceptable and clear (not ambiguous).
In the traditional role, as outlined by society, women are supposed to be defenders (setting the limits for sexual activity) and men are pursuers (initiating sexual activity). Therefore, for men, it’s a “it’s yes till you say no”. [That's why it's important for women to communicate a verbal "NO" firmly if they do not wish to be more intimate.] On the other hand, women prefer men to seek verbal consent even before initiating sexual activity.
He also found that the level of intimacy (kissing vs. sex) and familiarity of intimacy (penile-vaginal intercourse vs. anal sex) play a part in whether consent would likely be formally obtained or not. Obviously, the more intimate and the more unfamiliar would be more likely to require formal negotiations.
But these are not the interesting bits of the article.
Humphreys found the length of sexual involvement to be a factor in sexual consent perception.
In this study, participants were given vignettes to read. The story: a woman and a man were watching a video when the man initiated greater intimacy. Although the woman was not particularly keen on it, they eventually had sex. Vignettes were ambiguous about whether consent was given. The length of sexual involvement i.e. 1st date, 3 months dating, 2 years married, was varied between vignettes. The rest of the story was held constant.
The results?
Participants, both female and male, found the male protagonist to be less culpable as length of sexual involvement increases.
Why is this so?
In the beginning of a relationship, sexual negotiations tend to be formal. However, over time, non-verbal communications are deemed to be as effective as verbal ones. Couples are able to read behavioral cues accurately. Shortland and Goodstein (1992) came up with a theory on sexual activity: established sexual patterns are expected to continue (by both partners). They explained as partners being able to count on each other for sexual gratification. Shortland and Goodstein found in their study that both women and men perceived a resisting woman as more obliged to have sex if she had sex 10 times with a certain man, as opposed to if it was her first time with this man. And that sexual assault decreases and victim’s blame increases as the relationship becomes more intimate i.e. from stranger to acquaintance to marriage partner. [So you can imagine that increasing intimacy level from new boyfriend to old-time boyfriend to husband would have the same perception pattern.]
So tell me, what hope is there for marital immunity, when even women themselves perceived another woman as obliged to have sex when there is a history of sexual involvement?
