SL Letter of the Day: Criminal in Canada


"So your wife may not have difficultly perceiving the boundary violation here."

Should that "not" be in there? I think it flips the meaning from what I thought you were saying, which is that it may be a gray area to her because this sort of thing has happened in the past, so she might have difficulty.
I agree. Express your discomfort with the situation to your wife, explain that it bothers you, and make it a learning experience rather than a punitive experience.
Just.......has it come to this?

I get the slippery slope one can get on when it comes to looking the other way when it comes to consent and things like that. I get the dynamics of the situation and why it's smart to always get consent in a direct way and all that.......

I just.........can't, in any way, shape or form understand the thought process that this person could feel violated. And I get the whole idea that no one has the right to tell the other person how to feel and all that.

so I guess the only correct advice one can give to this person is, you have the right to your feelings, and if you feel violated, then you were violated. And you have the right to bring this up with your wife and she should apologize.

And I would then exercise my right to free association and cut such a sniveling twat out of my life.

I'm sure I'll take a beating for that here, but it is what it is I guess.
No one's suggesting he press charges, @3. Just that he's allowed to feel his feelings and the person who needs to hear about the feelings isn't Dan, but his wife.

Yeah, it has come to this: consent matters, even men's. Men are allowed to have feelings and express them, and even have sexual boundaries. Personally, all that seems like progress to me.
Also, I can't believe Dan missed the opportunity to encourage people to Fuck First.
When you're going out for an anniversary celebration, fuck first! If you leave it for later, you might be horny but passing-out drunk, which leads to Whisky Dick and/or Ambiguous Sleep Molestation. Reduce your risk of WD/ASM and Fuck First!
I understand that consent is important and sex without consent is always wrong. I guess I just consider this consent.

I understand that just because they're married does not mean they can be fucked by their partner at will.

But in a situation where a) the couple are in a long term relationship and routinely fuck b) the encounter in question was entered in to consensually c) the sex acts that occurred after the person fell asleep was completely routine and nothing they wouldn't have done anyways......then I guess I just consider that consent. Or at least, strongly implied consent.

Yeah 6. IMO this dude is wound awfully tight.
He: don't drink so much, for you are unable to handle things that ordinarily happen between drunken people in trusting relationships. If you think she meant anything other than that she wanted to fool around some more and hoped you would come to and find it sexy, then by all means dump her. If you truly think she acted with malice, that is your best option. But if you do not think that, then you need to let this go yesterday. It's normal.
She: if he won't let go of this and starts holding it over you, consider le dump.
This guy is never getting a wake up blow job again in his life. Get over it. I've passed out and had people pass out on me, who the fuck cares if they are your consenting partner. Maybe she was trying to arouse him back awake?
Is it possible, nay isn't it even LIKELY that CHUB may not be certain whether he lost consciousness (passed out) or lost his short-term memory (blacked out)? The latter is way more common than booze apologists like to acknowledge.

People have sex, pilot aircraft, perform surgery, marry strangers, fly to other cities etc. etc. without any memory of making those decisions. More commonly, people wake up after a party not knowing how they got home, or where their car is. Some folks don't know they've blacked out until they see late-night long distance calls on their phone bill. Or wake up next to a stranger.

It is possible that CHUB was conscious (sort of) and participating, even if the events are lost in a gap in his memory.
Usually I can guess what Dan's advice would be. I missed completely on this one. I find this husband's feelings to be totally irrational. He can certainly feel violated, but if I were married to someone who was this fragile, I would DTMFA

Also, I find it fascinating that the Canadian parliament will not allow adults to decide what to do with their bodies should they become too incapacitated for sex. Ironically, I can sign advance directives that allows my medical providers to pull the plug should I become incapacitated. But I can't sign a directive to allow my wife to grind me if I pass out. Makes perfect sense.
There is a line of comfort in all sexual relationships and the only way we learn where it is is by dancing around it. Sometimes we fuck up. The other person voices their feelings, the partner responds sympathetically and the line becomes clearer.

Unless it is a traumatic experience, you can probably move on - so long as you don't hold it against your partner. Your partner was wrong but try not to make it a deal breaker. Drink less, talk more.
@5: And stay away from this place.
I personally don't understand how she could have kept going with the dude drooling underneath her. Shit, dig out your favorite toy and go to town if you really need to get off. It would've been far more satisfying.
Speaking of Canada and issues of consent:…
@11: Don't despair. While, technically, an ordinary citizen might have to satisfy parliament before proceeding with sex, if you're a member of the governing Conservative Party you'll be able - and no doubt inclined - to safely ignore the wishes of Parliament without ever having to account for your actions.

Oh, Canada.
Spot on Qu for " The International Day for Elimination of Violence against Women ".
( Tuesday, Nov25th). Er, maybe not.
And I concur with Dans answer. If you feel violated then express very clearly that feeling to your wife. Insist that she hear you and never repeat that behaviour.
You can feel violated if that is how you actually feel about it. But you don't have to feel violated. You can feel turned on by it if you feel that way, or squeaked out but not violated, or whatever you actually feel, without overthinking it. If you feel violated, ask her never to do it again. Feel free to change your mind about that later, though and let her know.
I bet a woman wrote this and Dan flipped the gender to see who would make an ass of themselves in the comments.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to agree with the wife that her actions were funny, IF THEY EVEN HAPPENED. Even funnier if they never happened and she's just razzing him for passing out.

He was passed out. He woke up with no clue that anything unusual had happened. Claims no soreness, no odd puddles, no excessive number of pubic hairs scattered around the bed, no nagging feeling that something bad happened. Wife only subsequently taunts him months later that she "used" him for her own pleasure. Maybe she just has an odd sense of humor and is teasing him. Or he pissed her off recently, and this is her revenge.

There's a huge difference between a pattern of disrespect and abuse, and what I'm reading in this letter.

@11 and @12 both have valid reads on this. Plus, maybe @7 is right and this letter is fake.
Seems to be a bit of sexism going on here.
If this man feels violated, that his boundaries have been crossed- then that is as valid as a woman claiming the same.
Doesn't matter if this letter is fake, it brings up valid issues.
Hmm. One of my as of yet unrealized fantasies is being woken from a deep sleep by a blowjob in progress.

I've also been known on occasion to start kissing and groping my partners super passionately in my sleep, and then suddenly stop after a couple of minutes. Reactions so far are that's it's kind of funny and cute.
Put it on your Xmas list SeanDr. Not sure Santa will oblige, but hey, Ms Santa might be free..
Wait, wait... They were ALREADY FUCKING. Does that not comprise consent? Maybe an argument exists if this happens between two people who just met at a bar, but we're talking man and wife, for God's sake.

Also, this feels like a fake letter to me, designed to flip genders and provoke argument about double standards. I hope its fake anyway... Otherwise, this guy is seriously uptight and/or nursing a serious and preexisting trust issue with his spouse.
@23 Ah, a sleepfucker. Not rare, but you might want to get checked out for sleep apnea.

If you want a woman to wake you up with a blowjob, ask her to do it. For most of us it would seem kinda rapey to do something like that. Certainly creepy.
He can feel his feeling about this and be upset. And he can express those hurt feelings to his wife who, up until now, enjoyed being sexual with him.

And he can expect her to never initiate sex with him again. Ever.

That would be fair. Both ways.

And tragic.

Yeah, the letter is fake.
Gnot, I don't find that creepy at all. I'm guessing , a lot of men might have such a fantasy?
And I don't understand everyone's reactions to this man. Why should his wife stop initiating sex, if he is uncomfortable that she continued while he was out cold.
Didn't know being married gave someone the freedom to do whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted. Didn't know marriage took away a persons agency.
I wouldn't be at all surprised that a good portion of the discomfort he is feeling is the rampant double-standard he's just been subjected to. If a woman fell asleep during the middle of sex and the man kept going until he finished, the odds approach 100% that people would be calling him a rapist for not stopping as soon as he noticed she wasn't awake any more. Yet here she is acting like it was not only okay, but funny, to do the thing to him that, were he to do it to her, would get him jailed. Laughing about it like that would make me distrust my partner's trustworthiness.

Would you tell a man it's okay to have sex with his wife's unconscious body? Really?
As a bi man I have actively invited past boyfriends to wake me in a variety of ways but, if anyone is interested, you tend to wake up when someone shoves their dick into you.

That is different from having a dick inserted when one is passed-out drunk.

But if this guy is going to get upset about his partner humping and licking him, no doubt he will need trauma counselling if he ever gets a puppy.
I am tempted to recuse myself as a complete non-drinker, but after mentioning a vague suspicion that there may be unresolved pregnancy issues. If forced to take a position, I'd agree with Ms Lava, though I might wonder if Mr Savage is providing an Obligatory Official Position from which he might harbour some internal dissent.
@ 29 I just can't agree. I agree I personally would never do this to my wife. But that's because there IS a double standard, rightly or wrongly. In the context.of a rape culture, and the far too common backdrop of spousal sexual abuse, I honestly feel that the same act if the roles were reversed is probably best to be avoided, even if you strongly suspect your wife won't mind.

All in all, I just can't consider this situation one in which consent wasn't present. I mean, yes, IF they wernt in a trusting, long term, commited relationship, or IF the sex acts had started AFTER the person passed out or IF consent had been withdrawn before passing out or IF the sex acts that followed after the passing out were of the unusual type that they wouldn't normally indulge in (i. e. Did the partner take advantage of the others unconscious state to do something they know or might reasonably suspect they wouldn't do normally) THEN I would agree that this is a legit issue. If even ONE of those factors were present.

I just don't see how in a commited long term relationship, where you entered into a sexually encounter clearly willingly, and the only sex that happened is sex that would have occurred anyway (and probably DID occur before you passed out) could constitute a violation.

Like I said in my first comment, you can't tell someone how they feel. If this is how he feels, then we give that feeling validity.

With that said, this is not someone I would want in my life in any way if they're going to be this easily upset and feeling "violated".

@31 that's how I felt too. Dan knows it would be irresponsible and a very slippery slope to basically say "it's your commited partner man, grow the fuck up" especially in the context of rape.culture and spousal rape being fairly common.

With that said, reading between the lines, I don't think Dan actually views this as a violation.
Wtf? It is his body. You all agree, maybe , that this guy is
" allowed" his feelings. Then stick the knife in with references to puppy dogs and you wouldn't want to be his friend.
Men , can define their boundaries as they choose, the same as Women can. What, you respect a woman's rights in this area and not a man's ?
I just don't get that at all.
Oh fer pete's sake. Clearly she made a mistake:she should have stopped and then had a colossal meltdown, and then CHUB could tell us how he felt about that vis-a-vis continuing to have the sexy fun he had consented to start having with his wife.

Yes, we are all entitled to have and feel our feelings, but we are not entitled to have someone validate and acknowledge them.
@34 - it's pretty simple really: there is a ton of consent here already...they were already having sex...not just married, not just a history of having sex, but actually in the act in the moment.

I do think @7 is probably right: fake. A perfect just-so gender 180.
So @36, if the sex was reversed, it would be an ok scenario?
@23, that's pretty standard behavior for me. Morning tentpoles are so tempting. It's more of a way to segue into a vanilla fully awake morning roll in the hay. I've never been with a guy who minded, but I think from now on I'm going to get a verbal blanket consent ahead of time. And I'm going to stay out of Canada!
And the consent , no longer applicable, once he was out cold.
If my husband fell asleep during sex with me on our anniversary, and I was not supposed to continue having sex with him, my most appropriate recourse appears to be to find someone who is awake and have sex with him.
@6 Do you feel that way if you reverse the genders? A guy's wife passes out drunk in the middle of sex and he just says "fuck it", keeps having sex with her, and then says he stopped the next day, only to reveal 6 months later that actually he kept having sex with her unconscious body. And if she feels violated, she's a "sniveling twat"? If you feel that way, probably give your partners a heads up. Because it's a little rapey. Even between a husband and wife.

Sorry, but if someone passes out during sex with me I'm probably going to keep going for a bit to see if they don't wake up. And I can't imagine caring if my husband took a few minutes to realize/accept that we were done for the night.
I think this letter sounds fake, or from a whiny men's righter...
Part of the reason why it's important for people to be allowed to feel what they feel is that feelings sometimes give you more information about the situation than your conscious mind has processed. Anyone here read Malcolm Gladwell's Blink?

If he felt violated... well, he might have his own background baggage, but that feeling might also be a very useful sign about ongoing dynamics in the relationship that he hasn't consciously processed yet. Maybe if this were a different relationship, he would actually feel fine about unconscious sex with his wife. Maybe there's something to the fact that she lied about it, then brought it up six months later.

I obviously can't be certain about the unspoken details of a complete stranger's private life. But maybe the fact that he's able to point to this and say "I felt violated" is just a visible example of some ongoing, really sketchy dynamics in his marriage.
If this letter is true, both partners are very intoxicated, and already have impaired judgment. They both gave consent for intimacy, and one passes out, while the other is still very intoxicated, and is not exactly in a state to know if the person is falling asleep or whatever.

I don't see the scenario that one of the partners should had known that they had to stop, especially if they are married, or were living together and slept together numerous times, (both sleeping and physical intimacy) much like Dan's scenario of partners trying to wake the other up for a booty call, (ie sleeping person can't give consent)

I believe in marriage rape laws. I tend to believe rape is assault, and I don't see this scenario of drunken married couple, one passing out but showing all the signs of consent as this as rape or assault.

If anyone is going to be forgiving when a partner is embarrassed is their partner/snuggle bunny in a relationship, unless they went out of their way to impair their consent, so the person can be sexually assaulted. Both partners were heavily intoxicated..
I frequently talk in my sleep - entire, interactive conversations that go back and forth. I have no recollection of these conversations [my girlfriend reports that I am both much more blunt; but also much sweeter, in my sleep state]. She has mentioned numerous times that we've even had sleep-sex, and she uses that time to do things that I'm normally not especially into (positions, mostly).

Honestly, because my only knowledge of these times are her stories, they don't bother me that much; although i'm obviously being taken advantage of, there is no sacrifice on my part, so mostly I just let it be. I'd advise LW to think the same way; if you didn't sustain any injury (in the legal sense), you should mostly just get over it. Is there really another option?
Fake. And dumb. What kind of married person gets embarrassed when they are too drunk to fuck? That's the real issue IMHO. Grow up.
I will totally own that my initial reaction to this letter was a snort of derisive mockery. Your wife digs you and your body so much that not only was she not offended and hurt that you fell asleep, she actually ground on you a bit and tried to get off? Poor guy. Must be terrible.

But then, when I thought about it... I still felt that way. And if the genders were reversed? Yeah, it would be little different. Still not a crime (sorry Canada), but less cool. That's just how it is.
We only think the letter might be fake because of how our society have enforces and perpetuates gender roles and mores from our births. Men must be men etc., and men must always want sex, anywhere, anytime, anyhow. There's also the belief that men must be in control. He passed out and gave up/lost control. He doesn't know what happened to his body after he passed out except for what his wife told him. She could be telling the truth, could be lying, he doesn't know for sure. He is uncomfortable with this. I think that's reasonable, but of course I believe that males are capable of having all the feelings that females have, and many people believe otherwise. Yes, maybe he is wound a bit tight, but lots of people are, doesn't mean he's unnatural. Or maybe he is upset not so much by her continuing on and more because she laughed at his passing out and not able to finish. Maybe she told him she had to go down on him because he lost the erection and he felt unmanly. We can't know if he left out some details. All we know for sure is dude should consider not drinking so much that he passes out.

I myself wouldn't have continued on if my partner had passed out, how fun could that be? As another poster said, there are lots of toys that would give better satisfaction. But different strokes etc.
oh for fucks sake, you fucking ninny. your wife was trying to blow you back into consciousness so she could fuck your brains out. we should all be so lucky.
@48, Why do you think it's different if the genders were reversed?

"Your husband digs you and your body so much that not only was he not offended and hurt that you fell asleep, he actually ground on you a bit and tried to get off? Poor girl. Must be terrible."
Speaking of sex crimes in Canada, Jian Ghomeshi has just been charged with criminal sexual assault and "overcome resistance--choking"--and he surrendered to the police.…
@11 "Also, I find it fascinating that the Canadian parliament will not allow adults to decide what to do with their bodies should they become too incapacitated for sex."

Even the vagina-insertiest-"small-goverment" members of our Republican party aren't lobbying to actually have observers in each and every one of our sexy places; Canadians have hardly posted Mounties to observe all these interactions.

So, the only times this provision would come into play is when someone files a complaint.

It seems to me that this law is only designed to remove an avenue of defense when charges are brought.
I think this letter is fake. If it's not fake, the guy is weird.
Have to agree with some commenters here that this husband is being way to fragile for a married couple.

I wouldn't hold it against my wife if I passed out and she continued to use me to finish and I'd hold "it" against my wife and finish myself if the roles were reversed.

He has a right to his misguided feelings so good luck with that marriage, buddy.
For fuck sake, dump yourself already
Plenty of people admit they'd find the gender-reversed situation disturbing but are cool with this or even with mocking the guy. As a thought experiment, how would it strike you if the couple were gay men?

Is it really the committed relationship that makes it all okay, or is it that women's sexual behavior is seen as harmless while men's is seen as dangerous?

I don't think any of us here are arguing you can't wake your partner up with oral sex if they've said they like that -- we're not lawyers, who sometimes do. Just that the responsibility to stop fucking someone when they have lost consciousness and lost the ability to say they're into it, or indeed to be into it at all, is a pretty low bar really. Partnered sex requires a partner.
wow, he sounds like a real fun guy.


Enjoy never having your wife initiate sex ever again.
@57 - if they were gay men? Then yeah, he's still being an oversensitive weenie.
Is it the committed relationship or the fact that he's a dude that makes it okay? Both.
And lastly, I think everyone agrees that mutually-conscious sexual activity is preferable all around. But it is important that it wasn't penetrative - she wasn't making the unilateral decision to try to get pregnant, for example. I agree it's a low bar to ask for consciousness - but also, this is pretty low-octane molestation. The difference between this and rape is significant. Kind of like the gap between a leer and a grope: pretty big.
In my opinion, the fact she lied shows she didn't feel too comfortable about it.

Still in my opinion, the fact she lied is also what makes it worse. It's possible that if she had told him, at the time "you passed out and I kept going for a bit but you didn't wake up so I felt weird doing things to you when you weren't responding, and I stopped" he would have cared less.

However, she said "I stopped", probably because she felt she should have. Then much later it turns out she lied. The fact she lied is the unsettling part, to me. As you said, when you're in a long-term relationship, every so often there will be contact while one person is unconscious. But if you trust your partner to tell you if and when it happens and check with you, you can feel safe sleeping at night. If you don't trust your partner to tell you because they once kept it a secret for 6 months, that's quite different. Then you start wondering what they might be doing every night when you're sleeping next to them.

I think she realised it was wrong, and that's why she lied. But if she hadn't, it's quite possible the whole thing would have just been a tiny event they would have both moved on from ages ago. Your wife continuous to touch you after you pass out if one thing. Your wife lying to you about it for six months is another.
Dude, you got shitfaced and passed out *on your anniversary*!!! Be thankful your wife thinks it's funny, shrug it off, and move on.
@Lance Thrustwell: he's still being an oversensitive weenie.

Right. If I may summarize the majority opinion for you, LW, it's that behaving like an oversensitive weenie is only acceptable if you're a woman. Man up.
I don't know, I've passed out in medias res a couple of times (only slightly drunk, but really really exhausted). In the morning I've been a little surprised to discover that my partner *didn't* continue with matters, at least to the point of coming on me or something. Yes, PIV at that point would have been... inadvisable. But a little grinding doesn't strike me as out-of-the-way at all. And yes, I am a straight girl. Everyone's boundaries are different, but in my mind (though not his), the fact that I had consented to some pretty adult activities with the fellow on multiple occasions, including that night, implied that a little leg-humping wouldn't exactly lead to a lawsuit. Better to err on the side of caution, of course. But, I mean, marriage, and no penetration or anything, just a little writing and licking? All I can say is that I would be nowhere near as creeped out as this person was.
One thing the LW doesn't disclose was exactly how long his wife went along without him.

If my wife passed out during sex and I was most of the way there and just took the next minute to finish before passing out myself that very few people would care, including my wife.

If however she passed out and I initiated and completed sex that would greatly increases the creepiness factor.

While everybody is having fun discussing this keep in mind the point that context and intent matters.

If she was grinding away and playing with his limp body for half an hour then I think most would switch allegiances and declare his feelings justified, that his wife is a bit creepy.

Never mind the risk of injury from grinding someone's passed out, half-stiff dick for an extended period of time.
how can I help her to see my point of view?

Have her arrested and prosecuted so that she must register as a sex offender.
passing out and getting a bunch of dicks drawn on your face is probably comparable to this situation. very weird situation, nobody got hurt, but the trust required for the relationship has been altered for the guy. i would talk to her like she drew a bunch of dicks on your face and didn't roofie your drink and have her way with you.
@62 maybe it's the stereotype that women are so emotional they have no control over themselves so they shouldn't be held responsible for their actions lest the consequences damage their paper thin self images that the patriarchy has worked tirelessly to destroy. i am woman hear me roar...

lets face the facts, men ruin vaginas by making babies grow inside a womans body, if it weren't for those damn men women would be perfectly happy
@57 - it's more about the fact they are married. They were celebrating an anniversary, so assume they have been having sex for years. I can't wrap my mind around someone rationally feeling violated when their spouse has sex with them passed out ( I also can't wrap my mind around people who think porn watching is cheating - and Dan takes those people to task as I thought he would have done so here). FWIW, I asked Mrs. Horton and she similarly wouldn't care if I finished sex with her when she was passed out. If she did it to me I would be flattered.

Double standard if you flipped genders? I suppose a little bit, although I would still be surprised by a woman feeling violated in this situation. Anyway, Dan has endorsed sexual double standards - see e.g. his advice to parents of gay teens counselling them as you would a daughter since they are on the receiving end of male sexual attention.
People's consent matters. That means that it matters if someone says that they want to be woken up with sex, or want their partner to have sex with them while they are passed out. I hadn't heard that in Canada I can't consent to having my body used by a partner of mine while I am unconscious. What a shame. 'Cause that turns me on.

Because consent matters, it also matters that the LW isn't comfortable with the passed out sex done to him. His wife needs to accept that he's not down with that, that this wasn't funny to him, and that she shouldn't lie about what she's done to him.

It's not gender that matters here, it's desire. Flipping the genders doesn't change anything. The lying is bad, period, but the moral situation of the sex itself depends on the opinion of the people involved.

And I will continue to tell my partners, early and often, how much I approve of passed out sex.
68 i think the double standard comes in the reaction from people outside the relationship. if it happened to a wife the husband would be a vile man, if it happens to a husband we see some of the responses we have here. it's the invalidation of the mans feelings that is the double standard.
I'm with Avistew @60. The wife knew it was wrong, which is why she lied originally. Probably she should have kept the incident to herself (and never repeated the mistake), the way Dan advises people to keep one-night-stands to themselves.
@67. Funny. Women have no control over themselves? Gee. I thought it much more the other way around.
Ain't us who give in to our rages and jealousies and sense of ownership of others that we hit, rape and murder them..
One woman a week is murdered by her spouse or former spouse in Australia.

@37 - sorry, moved onto other things, just now checking back in on Slog.

Yes, if the genders were reversed, it would be OK. What makes this "ok" or at least not a violation, is that they're married, evidently on good terms, and had consensually started having sex. She didn't do anything to him, except keep riding the dick he put in her consentingly, and when it became obvious he was out, she attempted to rouse him.

If you said he woke up with a giant dildo buried (painfully) up his ass because she'd decided to take advantage of his passed-out state to do something he'd always refused when sober and awake, you'd have a case.

An implicit consent exists with your committed partner unless they've previously made it clear that permission is revoked or temporarily suspended. He started fucking her. That's why this isn't rapey and the genders don't matter. The Canadians are ordinarily sensible people, but have clearly gone off the deep end in trying to draw bright line law for a situation with a lot of nuance.
I would add that for me personally, if my wife zonked out on me in the middle of sex, I'd stop immediately, mainly because it would be a total boner killer - for me partnered sex is about two people having fun together, and sex dolls and passed out bodies don't count, nevermind the ego blow of being such a great lover someone passed out (sarcasm).
Christ. This letter is so god damned fake. It's like some sort of stridency detector posing as an advice letter.
Maybe so @75. It's been interesting though. I'm still confused at the level of mockery directed at this man, imagined story or not.
Sorry AFinch. Just don't agree. If a woman( or man) has started sex, and then half way thru just can't continue, sudden repulsion, whatever- by your position- they have to continue because consent was made at beginning of encounter.
Happy Thanksgiving all you guys.
Sounds like a nice celebration to have.
@76 - We're just gonna have to agree to disagree; to me there is a difference between saying "I want to stop" and passing out, in the context of a long term pattern of saying yes. You (and many others on this thread) keep extending the analogy to pull in lots of other cases which don't exist here: sudden revulsion is not the same thing as passing out, and sudden revulsion would probably be accompanied with "please stop".

I support marriage rape laws and appreciate the desire to make them expansive in order to put the burden (close all the loopholes) on the person seeking consent, but there are limits to how expansive you can make that without getting into territory where as @65 suggests, he could have her arrested and declared a sex offender more or less at whim.

I hope you have a happy virtual-pseudo Thanksgiving too :-)
Canadian here. Let me put this into perspective, based on several media (Globe & Mail, our equivalent of the NY Times except more conservative) stories about one court case I've read. I'm not a lawyer and I've read none of the primary documents, so I could be certainly wrong about things, but here's a summary of my understanding of the case:

1. A dude is a member of an outlaw biker gang. Police are pretty sure he's a crook but they haven't been able to pin anything on him (again, this is all me paraphrasing news reports I read years ago).
2. Dude gets in a squabble with his girlfriend. Girlfriend goes to police and tells them dude stuck a dildo in her ass while she was sleeping.
3. Police charge dude with sexual assault, and he's convicted. The case gets appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, which upholds the conviction and comments in a footnote that the way the law is written, if the police charged someone with kissing their spouse while the spouse was sleeping, the court would be obliged to convict the kisser, so Parliament might want to consider amending the law.
4. Police show no signs of interest in investigating people for this sort of thing in situations where no one's made a complaint. Parliament shows no signs of wanting to spend its time amending a law over a hypothetical.
5. Dude and his girlfriend made up almost immediately. News media report that sticking a dildo in her ass while she was sleeping was something that happened regularly both before and after the incident he was charged with because they were both into it. News media do not report that police are investigating these reports of alleged crimes published in a major newspaper read by hundreds of thousands of people.

Having said that, people are saying that this law is about consent. It's not, and it's especially not about male consent mattering (what a joke THAT is!) This law explicitly says that when I am sleeping my consent is immaterial, nonexistant, not allowed. This law says that while I am sleeping, my body is owned by and under the control of the feminist academics and lawyers who designed this bill, people who do not give a shit about the wellbeing of people like me. This contrasts dramatically with laws regarding medical consent, in which I can give consent in advance for periods when I won't be able to give consent for all sorts of medical decisions, including decisions which may end my life. But I can't give sexual consent in advance for a girlfriend to kiss me chastely while I am sleeping. The difference is that the medical consent laws are designed in good faith to work for and protect both medical practitioners and patients, while the sexual consent laws are designed to make it as easy as possible to get convict men of sexual assault.
Yeah go ahead and tell her. I've got a feeling you'll never feel violated again. Or touched, or even married.
@Old Crow: ...sexual consent laws are designed to make it as easy as possible to get convict men of sexual assault.

[slow clap]

It's not just sexual assault - see, for example, laws in Sweden that make it a crime for men to pay for sex but not for women to sell it. Here, feminist academics have assumed control over consent of women who try to put a price tag on it.
Wow this thread took a bad turn at W. Shitstorm Avenue.
@80: fucking lel
If you have an understanding between the two of you that it's okay to keep going after one of you slips out of consciousness, that seems like a deal two consenting adults should be able to make, assuming the usual things about good faith etc.

But if you don't have an understanding like that, why would you not default to thinking consent stops when someone goes unconscious? I agree with LavaGirl and the few others who've taken that view, and I'm really disturbed at the number of people who just pile on the guy for feeling badly about it.

It's not like his only option to express discomfort is to report her to the police or otherwise put her off all future sexing. You know, seeing they're two grown-ups and married and all.
@82: I shouldn't have written that. I've never met any of the people who designed those laws, nor am I am mind reader, so speculating on their motivations is foolishness on my part.

Having said that, I think the laws for sexual consent while not awake should follow the laws for medical consent: you don't have such consent until you've been explicitly given it, and it can be withdrawn at any time, but the other person can give such consent if they desire to do so.
I'm a woman married to a man and I wouldn't care at all if I passed out and he kept pumping away.

Everyone's okay with different things. Figure these sorts of things out BEFORE you get married.
The Canadian law is bullshit. The Swedish law is bullshit.

I have explicit consent from my partners to molest them while they are sleeping, and they have explicit consent from me to do the same. I advise everyone to follow suit, so that you can avoid ending up in a relationship with the people who have hangups around this, and they can stick to dating people who agree with them that they should never touch each other unless fully conscious.
Or you could just get over it.
I suspect he feels violated, because his wife is talking about it in a callous manner. I suspect if she'd framed the actions differently, he might feel better about them, but instead she is talking about having physically used him and found it funny to take sexual advantage of him. It sounds like she framed it in a way that is violating and discusses it in a way that makes him feel violated. I would honestly want to check if there are any other ways in which she treats his feelings and consent as unimportant. But it really sounds to me like she not only took advantage of him, but she likes laughing about it, and that it's the latter part that caused it to be a violation.

Also, I am really surprised that they hadn't both discussed their personal preferences with regards to what is okay when asleep or unconscious. I expect to discuss that early on with a regular sexual partner, just so we both know what the other person is and is not okay with. She shouldn't have kept going when they haven't discussed this (as it sounds like they have not), and they should discuss boundaries and stick to them in the future. People vary widely on what they are comfortable with, so just explicitly determine what you and your partner are okay with.
I can't believe some commenters are taking the LW seriously. He consented to having sex, and he fell asleep before she was ready too. Would he prefer she masturbrate while he's asleep, or just fall asleep frustrated and angry?

It's not rape if you're already having consensual sex! Good for her to continue and take her own pleasure. I would hope my wife would do the same if I passed out on our anniversary.
Is no one at all considering the possibility that the husband had previously been sexually assaulted? 'Cause it's not that rare. That would certainly put ones hackles up to put it mildly. It's part of why this sort of thing would probably be inadvisable with many women (more likely with women due to higher rates of assault) unless explicitly discussed, and for the same reason.
I'm not necessarily calling this letter a fake, but this couple has a deeper problem with the way they (don't) communicate with each other. It's too bad LW didn't mention which wedding anniversary they were celebrating. Could it have been only their first? After a fairly short courtship?

I can remember loads of whimsical, or inadvertently awkward sexual situations, that I've reminisced over with lovers (including one falling asleep during a bj). But, for the wife to act in an offhandedly callous manner, revealing the true details SIX months later is just weird. I wonder if she was angry at him for some recent slight, with prior resentment building up in the meantime in other areas, so the easiest weapon was to recall this SINGLE embarrassing moment, intending to shame him, first for falling asleep and subsequently losing his erection. Or perhaps she took it all much too personally – that she wasn't woman enough to keep him awake and interested. Or she felt abandoned that he'd fallen asleep at the end of their anniversary celebration. Or else there's the possibility nobody has entertained: that she lied about it. Just to hurt him.

As for the idea that the LW may have been assaulted previously (as proposed by #91), well, once again, it's a matter of not disclosing (communicating) to his wife – even in the most oblique manner – at the beginning of the relationship, that consent is critical and that he is unwilling to be engaged in sleepy sex.

Whatever the underlying tensions of which this is probably only the tip of the iceberg, I think this couple needs to avail themselves of a compassionate, but sex-positive marriage counselor.
I'll just add on to the pile of people who think the husband is overreacting--and also, I don't think it's gendered. If I passed out when my husband and I were *already having sex* and he kept going, I would have no problem with that at all. I like it when he has a good time. I'd rather be awake for it, but even if I'm not, I'm still for it. Doesn't feel rapey to me at all.
CHUB is a pussy wussy. Poor guy wa wa wa.
Dude you gave consent when you started fooling around. you got her aroused and then passed out/blacked out. You got her aroused!!!!! She gets to finish even if you didn't which is what I feel the problem is. She got hers and you didn't get yours.
If he feels like his wife raped him then every time CHUB jerks off he is playing around on her. Infidelity on his part.
At times my wife falls asleep while we are spooning, she loves and feels it is perfectly natural for me to be inside her and get off. She wakes in the am realizes I had fun and smiles to herself that she can please me even while asleep. For me it is an incredible experience to be able to get off and not wake her.
CHUB fucked up big time. CHUB you will never wake up to a blow job my friend. Thats right bro, No consent no BJ for you.
If I was your wife Id get rid of you. Whining cause your wife finished without you. PUSSY boy.
FAKE--This letter was either written by a male who changed the gender pronouns to make a point about gender discrepancy in attitudes towards consent, or perhaps more sinisterly was changed by Dan to remake the same point he has oft made--that is, reverse the genders and you get very different attitudes about what constitutes sexual assault.

Tip off: "She wasn't specific on the details, but I don't think that we continued having penetrative vaginal sex. She said that she kept grinding on me and even went down on me a little."

Really, "penetrative vaginal sex" when you're a passed out drunk dude? "Went down on" you instead of, say, simply sucking your cock? Not words that plausibly come out of a guy's mouth, now are they!

You can make your point without being fake, but this letter is indeed FAKE.
As an addendum to the previous comment...

It also seems just as likely to me that the letter was written by a woman who spelled out a common scenario that happens with the genders are reversed, and switched them around either just to troll Dan, or see what kind of reaction it would provoke from the readership/commentariat.

Well, regardless of who actually wrote it, the reaction it provokes in me is: FAAAAAAAAKE, with a capital FAKE.
Just one question: How close was your wife to coming when you passed out?