A certain country's reputation for a mature and relaxed attitude to sex takes a hit

I've been meaning to post about the extraordinary rape case in France, in which a husband of mature age set up a scheme in which his wife would be heavily sedated, and then men invited online to have sex with her.

What seems particularly unbelievable is the number of men willing to participate (83 potential participants, of whom 50 are being tried for rape.)   I mean, France is supposed to be the country where people fall in love and have sex at the drop of a hat, and affairs are (more-or-less) common, with mature couples and friends being prepared to "look the other way" as long as it is discreet and doesn't interfere with family life.   A reputation for what might be called a relaxed, or mature (well, that's debatable, I know), attitude towards sex - and hence a country where happy consensual sex is easy to find.

Not the country of scores of desperate and hard up men online looking for invitations to have sex with a sleeping wife!   I mean, what's the appeal of sex with an inactive partner anyway?  

I had wondered whether some of the accused would claim that they thought she was just acting and part of the "game" when she was sleepy or groggy during sex, and it would seem from the report I have linked to, some are trying it on.    Yet it seems the husband himself has pleaded guilty, so I don't know that his take on what happened is going to help anyone.

Meanwhile, in Queensland we've just had the law changed to put a positive obligation to know there is consent to sex.   The government website gives these illustrations of when there will be a problem:

The new consent laws outline some of the circumstances where there will be no consent. These include where someone…

• did not say or do anything to communicate consent;
• does not have the cognitive capacity to consent;
• is so affected by alcohol or another drug they are incapable of consenting or withdrawing consent;
• is unconscious or asleep;
• participates in the act because of force, a fear of force, harm of any type or a fear of harm of any type, whether to the person or another person, animal or property, and regardless of whether it was a single incident or part of a pattern of behaviour;
• participates in the act because of coercion, blackmail or intimidation, regardless of when it occurs or whether it is a single incident or part of an ongoing pattern;
• participates in the act because the person or another person is unlawfully confined, detained or otherwise deprived or their personal liberty;
• participates in the act because the person is overborne by the abuse of a relationship of authority, trust or dependence;
• participates in the act because of a false or fraudulent representation about the nature or purpose of the act, including about whether the act is for health, hygienic or cosmetic purposes;
• participates in the act with another person because the person is mistaken about the identity of the other person  or participates in the act with another person because the person is mistaken they are married to the other person;
• is a sex worker and participates in the act because of a false or fraudulent representation that the person will be paid or receive some reward for the act;
• participates in the act with another person on the basis that a condom is used for the act and the other person does any of the following things before or during the act: does not use a condom; tampers with the condom; removes the condom; or becomes aware that the condom is no longer effective but continues with the sexual act (‘stealthing’).

I can imagine that this will cause some difficult cases in future, if the law survives a change of government.