US Court: Women can't say no after sex has started—it’s a contract

Now here is a ruling that reminds me why we need more women on the bench. In any contract law, I assumed that we have the right to break the contract as long as we paid the financial consequences. If the argument goes that consent for sex is a contract, then why don’t we have the right to break it and be sued…instead of be raped. It's not as if I broke a contract for employment and the employer could physically force me to continue working...because I said I would type that document and started to....

Below is an excerpt from an online article of Feministing:

“An appellate court said Maryland's rape law is clear -- no doesn't mean no when it follows a yes and intercourse has begun. A three-judge panel of the Court of Special Appeals Monday threw out a rape conviction saying that a trial judge in Montgomery County erred when he refused to answer the jury's question on that very point.

The appeals court said that when the jury asked the trial judge if a woman could withdraw her consent after the start of sex, the jury should have been told she could not. The ruling said the law is not ambiguous and is a tenet of common-law.

So ladies, once it's in, it's in. Ain't nothing you can do about it. Changed your mind? Suck it up. He's hurting you? Oh, sorry--should have thought of that before. After all, it's not like your body is yours or anything.”

Click here for the full ruling.