Recently heartiste linked here http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-06/NS-Raes-1906101.php. From the article:
He believes that what constitutes rape or a consensual sexual act within a relationship can be extremely ambiguous and says that phone surveys often push women into claiming they have been raped. “When relationships sour, women often redefine them in a destructive form,” adds Furedi. Rape has also meant different things through history. “Considering it as a strategy is essentially nonsense.” Gottschall says women may also sometimes reinterpret a rape as a consensual act years later when the relationship has improved. He agrees that the data in the surveys is not perfect, “but the best information we have still all points in one direction”.
You will see these observations numerous times in marriages, separations and divorces. Once a marriage ends, women will often begin talking about how they were a victim to a man’s sexual needs, even though they never complained during the marriage (or, they only complain when there are problems). These stories used by women are intended to solely attract attention, along with excusing responsibility. Instead of “I hooked up with many men,” it is “I was used by many men.”
In a sense, from a man’s perspective, little that you do is wrong or right in seeing a woman from an objective standpoint. If she’s happy with you, you are a wonderful man. If things are bad, you have abused her.
This may seem obvious to those in the Red Pill community, but in a nutshell, this explains exactly why our judicial system works against men. It fails to consider that a woman’s story, post a break-up, has changed based on the circumstances of the relationship. More than likely, the behavior a woman complains about to an authority was present throughout the relationship and she enjoyed it; but now that the relationship is over, she hates it and feels used by it.