What do you think?
Rate this book
Without Consent: A Landmark Trial and the Decades-Long Struggle to Make Spousal Rape a Crime
From Sarah Weinman, author of Scoundrel and The Real Lolita, comes an eye-opening story about the first major spousal rape trial in America and urgent questions about women’s rights that would reverberate for decades.
In 1978, Greta Rideout was the first woman in United States history to accuse her husband of rape, at a time when the idea of “marital rape” seemed ludicrous to many Americans and was a crime in only four states. After a quick and conservative trial acquitted John Rideout and a defense lawyer lambasted that “maybe rape is the risk of being married,” Greta was ridiculed and scorned from public life, while John went on to be a repeat offender. Thrust into the national spotlight, Greta and her story would become a national sensation, a symbol of a country’s unrelenting and targeted hate toward women and a court system designed to fail them at every turn.
A now little-remembered trial deserving of close, wide, and lasting attention, Sarah Weinman turns her signature intelligence and journalistic rigor to the enduring impact of this case. Oregon v. Rideout directly inspired feminist activists, who fought state by state for marital rape laws, a battle that was not won in all fifty until as recently as 1993. Mixing archival research and new reporting involving Greta, those who successfully pressed charges against John in later years, as well as the activists battling the courts in parallel, Without Consent embodies vociferous debates about gender, sexuality, and power, while highlighting the damaging and inherent misogyny of American culture then and still now.
In 1978, Greta Rideout was the first woman in United States history to accuse her husband of rape, at a time when the idea of “marital rape” seemed ludicrous to many Americans and was a crime in only four states. After a quick and conservative trial acquitted John Rideout and a defense lawyer lambasted that “maybe rape is the risk of being married,” Greta was ridiculed and scorned from public life, while John went on to be a repeat offender. Thrust into the national spotlight, Greta and her story would become a national sensation, a symbol of a country’s unrelenting and targeted hate toward women and a court system designed to fail them at every turn.
A now little-remembered trial deserving of close, wide, and lasting attention, Sarah Weinman turns her signature intelligence and journalistic rigor to the enduring impact of this case. Oregon v. Rideout directly inspired feminist activists, who fought state by state for marital rape laws, a battle that was not won in all fifty until as recently as 1993. Mixing archival research and new reporting involving Greta, those who successfully pressed charges against John in later years, as well as the activists battling the courts in parallel, Without Consent embodies vociferous debates about gender, sexuality, and power, while highlighting the damaging and inherent misogyny of American culture then and still now.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published November 11, 2025
46 people are currently reading
7259 people want to read
About the author
Sarah Weinman
36 books303 followersSarah Weinman is the author of The Real Lolita: A Lost Girl, An Unthinkable Crime, and a Scandalous Masterpiece, which was named a Best Book of 2018 by NPR, BuzzFeed, The National Post, Literary Hub, the San Francisco Chronicle, and Vulture, and won the Arthur Ellis Award for Excellence in Crime Writing. She also edited the anthologies Unspeakable Acts: True Tales of Crime, Murder, Deceit & Obsession (Ecco) Women Crime Writers: Eight Suspense Novels of the 1940s & 50s (Library of America) and Troubled Daughters, Twisted Wives (Penguin).
Weinman writes the twice-monthly Crime column for the New York Times Book Review. A 2020 National Magazine Award finalist for Reporting, her work has also appeared most recently in New York, The Wall Street Journal, Vanity Fair, the Washington Post, and AirMail, while her fiction has been published in Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine, Alfred Hitchcock’s Mystery Magazine, and numerous anthologies. Weinman also writes (albeit less regularly) the “Crime Lady” newsletter, covering crime fiction, true crime, and all points in between.
She lives in New York City.
(sarahweinman.com)
Weinman writes the twice-monthly Crime column for the New York Times Book Review. A 2020 National Magazine Award finalist for Reporting, her work has also appeared most recently in New York, The Wall Street Journal, Vanity Fair, the Washington Post, and AirMail, while her fiction has been published in Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine, Alfred Hitchcock’s Mystery Magazine, and numerous anthologies. Weinman also writes (albeit less regularly) the “Crime Lady” newsletter, covering crime fiction, true crime, and all points in between.
She lives in New York City.
(sarahweinman.com)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
November 4, 2025
An eye-opening exploration of an important issue. With respect to raising awareness about the need to criminalize spousal rape, considerable progress has been made in recent years, but clearly there's more work to be done. (extended thoughts & quotes below) 👇
INTRO
This book promises to:
- Chronicle the once notorious (but now little-remembered) trial of the first woman to legally accuse her spouse of rape (while still married and living with him).
- Recount how Greta & John Rideout navigated the unwelcome celebrity (and later obscurity) tied to the case.
- Reveal the trial's vexing results (and surprising aftermath).
- Follow the woman who, inspired by the case, brought about significant changes to the legal system, and more.
CHP 01
This chapter introduces Greta & John Rideout, as well as their families. Interesting to note that Greta did not want to marry John, but because she was financially struggling, she felt she had to.
Put simply, John Rideout's behavior behind closed doors was devastating (full details in the book). He also had terrible hygiene, apparently, choosing not to bathe for days and never brushing his teeth. 🤢
CHP 02
October 10, 1978 - Greta and John have their worst fight to date and he commits the violent act that will set into motion the first major spousal rape trail in America.
CHP 03
Weinman hits pause on the story here to look back at the history of the law surrounding marital rape. Highly interesting to see some of the hurdles spouses (namely women) faced, not least among them the belief that once a woman was married, she was her husband's property.
🤯 While rape has been recognized by law as a crime since the US was founded, it wasn't until 1861 that Black women could file rape charges.
🚨 OKAY THIS IS WELL AND TRULY ASTOUNDING 👇
In 1975, South Dakota became the first state to outlaw spousal rape entirely. The bill included language that stated "an act of sexual penetration accomplished with any person". But this law was amended in 1977 by Republican legislatures, who added "...any person other than the actor's spouse". 😱
^ I REPEAT: South Dakota's Republican legislatures intentionally amended a bill to keep spousal rape legal. South Dakota would not recriminalize spousal rape until 1990.
CHP 04
🎤 John Rideout is on record saying to police: "I thought if I hit her, she would come out of it." He told a police detective the beating wasn't so bad and that if he'd gone all the way, if he had "done it right, she wouldn't be here to complain." Remember this when you learn the verdict.
Oh my word... Despite policy that a rape victim's name be kept out of the paper, a reporter chose to to publish Greta Rideout's name along with her home address, so naturally she received hateful and threatening letters and phone calls.
It continues to amaze me that a woman's sex life would be taken into consideration in a rape case (as it was with Greta's). It has absolutely nothing to do with whether she was beaten and assaulted.
CHP 05
As part of opening arguments, the prosecutor was granted his request that all jurors visit the scene of Greta's alleged rape by her husband. Am I the only one who finds this bizarre?
CHP 06
📝 So the jurors deliberated and the verdict was...
CHP 07
🚨OH. MY. GOSH. When you hear why some of the jurors justified their decision...😡
In response to learning that Greta was violently attacked, forced to the ground, and choked while she was raped, one juror said she "did not have to stay there and take it." Like, SIR, SHE WAS FORCED DOWN AGAINST HER WILL BY A MAN WHO WAS MUCH BIGGER THAN HER. WHAT DO YOU MEAN SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO STAY THERE AND TAKE IT?! This smacks of "Why didn't you just close your legs?" 🤬⁉️
Another juror said Greta's response to her alleged rape wasn't how she would react if she were raped, so she dismissed Greta's allegation.
CHP 08
This was Greta's situation post trial:
- Jobless for three months
- Car broken & she couldn't afford to repair it
- Religious friend said the Lord told him he was supposed to get Greta & John back together.
So, yeah... Greta reconciled with her husband and they got back together. (Mind you, it's not uncommon for women in abusive relationships to keep going back, often because they've been conditioned to accept abuse and/or they don't have the support needed to break free.)
Fortunately, this chapter ends on a positive note with...
CHP 09
My wild takeaway from this chapter is that after the trial, the state sued John Rideout for the $4,200 in welfare Greta received during the couple's three-month separation during the trial.
CHP 10
This chapter discusses how the Rideout's story was adapted to film and makes some interesting points about how spousal rape had been portrayed in entertainment media up to that point. One example is Gone with the Wind and how Scarlett had a big smile on her face the morning after her husband raped her, which perpetuated the idea that rape was something a woman wanted. 🙄
CHP 11
In which we meet activist Laura X, a woman who played a crucial role in broadening the general public's understanding of what constituted rape in a marriage and why spousal rape should be taken seriously.
CHP 12
I had no idea the Phil Donahue show aired an episode that educated the public on spousal rape.
CHP 13
This chapter makes clear the lasting effects of rape and how the victim is not always limited to the person whose body was violated. If you do not yet understand the longevity of this kind of trauma, please read this book.
CHP 14
😭 I was so devastated by what I read in this chapter that I paused to bury my face in my hand and let free a few tears.
CHP 15
I did not expect to see Lorena Bobbitt in this book. 😵💫
All I ever knew about the Bobbitts was that a crazy lady chopped off her husband's penis. I had no idea what was happening to her behind closed doors and how it drove her to take violent action against her spouse.
CHP 16
The year is 1993 and North Carolina becomes the last state to criminalize spousal rape in the U.S.
CHP 17
🚨 John Rideout reoffends, raping a fellow churchgoer.🚨
CHP 18
🚨 John Rideout reoffends AGAIN, raping an old school friend.🚨
CHP 19
Thirty-eight years after his first rape trial, John Rideout is going to trial again for rape.
CHP 20 & 21
We get into the details of the trial here, ultimately arriving at a verdict of...
🚨 At his sentencing, John Rideout gave a 45-minute-long speech in which he painted himself as a victim and ranted about fake news, saying, "Donald Trump's right, to a degree." Is it surprising that a convicted rapist idolizes Donald Trump, a man who is also a convicted rapist and openly brags about assaulting women? No, it's not.
CHP 22
For complicated reasons (please read the book!), there had to be a retrial, which means Rideout's latest two victims were forced to relive their trauma in excruciating detail. Brutal.
The good news is...
EPILOGUE
There are too many eyebrow raising quotes in this chapter to include here, but these are a few that made my jaw drop:
*NOTE: Quote(s) taken from an ARC and are subject to change in the final printing.
My heartfelt thanks to the kind people at Ecco Books for providing an ARC of this book.
INTRO
This book promises to:
- Chronicle the once notorious (but now little-remembered) trial of the first woman to legally accuse her spouse of rape (while still married and living with him).
- Recount how Greta & John Rideout navigated the unwelcome celebrity (and later obscurity) tied to the case.
- Reveal the trial's vexing results (and surprising aftermath).
- Follow the woman who, inspired by the case, brought about significant changes to the legal system, and more.
Feminism has tried to move on to different battles than those originally waged during its second wave, but it also must keep fighting those same battles, because nothing is ever truly a permanent win. That's because the main problems in American culture, even and especially the ones activists sought to overcome, remain the same: men feel entitled to the bodies and minds of women, and the idea that wives are "property" persisted—and, devastatingly, still persists today.*
CHP 01
This chapter introduces Greta & John Rideout, as well as their families. Interesting to note that Greta did not want to marry John, but because she was financially struggling, she felt she had to.
Put simply, John Rideout's behavior behind closed doors was devastating (full details in the book). He also had terrible hygiene, apparently, choosing not to bathe for days and never brushing his teeth. 🤢
CHP 02
October 10, 1978 - Greta and John have their worst fight to date and he commits the violent act that will set into motion the first major spousal rape trail in America.
CHP 03
Weinman hits pause on the story here to look back at the history of the law surrounding marital rape. Highly interesting to see some of the hurdles spouses (namely women) faced, not least among them the belief that once a woman was married, she was her husband's property.
🤯 While rape has been recognized by law as a crime since the US was founded, it wasn't until 1861 that Black women could file rape charges.
🚨 OKAY THIS IS WELL AND TRULY ASTOUNDING 👇
In 1975, South Dakota became the first state to outlaw spousal rape entirely. The bill included language that stated "an act of sexual penetration accomplished with any person". But this law was amended in 1977 by Republican legislatures, who added "...any person other than the actor's spouse". 😱
^ I REPEAT: South Dakota's Republican legislatures intentionally amended a bill to keep spousal rape legal. South Dakota would not recriminalize spousal rape until 1990.
CHP 04
🎤 John Rideout is on record saying to police: "I thought if I hit her, she would come out of it." He told a police detective the beating wasn't so bad and that if he'd gone all the way, if he had "done it right, she wouldn't be here to complain." Remember this when you learn the verdict.
Oh my word... Despite policy that a rape victim's name be kept out of the paper, a reporter chose to to publish Greta Rideout's name along with her home address, so naturally she received hateful and threatening letters and phone calls.
It continues to amaze me that a woman's sex life would be taken into consideration in a rape case (as it was with Greta's). It has absolutely nothing to do with whether she was beaten and assaulted.
CHP 05
As part of opening arguments, the prosecutor was granted his request that all jurors visit the scene of Greta's alleged rape by her husband. Am I the only one who finds this bizarre?
CHP 06
📝 So the jurors deliberated and the verdict was...
CHP 07
🚨OH. MY. GOSH. When you hear why some of the jurors justified their decision...😡
In response to learning that Greta was violently attacked, forced to the ground, and choked while she was raped, one juror said she "did not have to stay there and take it." Like, SIR, SHE WAS FORCED DOWN AGAINST HER WILL BY A MAN WHO WAS MUCH BIGGER THAN HER. WHAT DO YOU MEAN SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO STAY THERE AND TAKE IT?! This smacks of "Why didn't you just close your legs?" 🤬⁉️
Another juror said Greta's response to her alleged rape wasn't how she would react if she were raped, so she dismissed Greta's allegation.
CHP 08
This was Greta's situation post trial:
- Jobless for three months
- Car broken & she couldn't afford to repair it
- Religious friend said the Lord told him he was supposed to get Greta & John back together.
So, yeah... Greta reconciled with her husband and they got back together. (Mind you, it's not uncommon for women in abusive relationships to keep going back, often because they've been conditioned to accept abuse and/or they don't have the support needed to break free.)
Fortunately, this chapter ends on a positive note with...
CHP 09
My wild takeaway from this chapter is that after the trial, the state sued John Rideout for the $4,200 in welfare Greta received during the couple's three-month separation during the trial.
CHP 10
This chapter discusses how the Rideout's story was adapted to film and makes some interesting points about how spousal rape had been portrayed in entertainment media up to that point. One example is Gone with the Wind and how Scarlett had a big smile on her face the morning after her husband raped her, which perpetuated the idea that rape was something a woman wanted. 🙄
CHP 11
In which we meet activist Laura X, a woman who played a crucial role in broadening the general public's understanding of what constituted rape in a marriage and why spousal rape should be taken seriously.
CHP 12
I had no idea the Phil Donahue show aired an episode that educated the public on spousal rape.
CHP 13
This chapter makes clear the lasting effects of rape and how the victim is not always limited to the person whose body was violated. If you do not yet understand the longevity of this kind of trauma, please read this book.
CHP 14
😭 I was so devastated by what I read in this chapter that I paused to bury my face in my hand and let free a few tears.
CHP 15
I did not expect to see Lorena Bobbitt in this book. 😵💫
All I ever knew about the Bobbitts was that a crazy lady chopped off her husband's penis. I had no idea what was happening to her behind closed doors and how it drove her to take violent action against her spouse.
CHP 16
The year is 1993 and North Carolina becomes the last state to criminalize spousal rape in the U.S.
CHP 17
🚨 John Rideout reoffends, raping a fellow churchgoer.🚨
CHP 18
🚨 John Rideout reoffends AGAIN, raping an old school friend.🚨
CHP 19
Thirty-eight years after his first rape trial, John Rideout is going to trial again for rape.
CHP 20 & 21
We get into the details of the trial here, ultimately arriving at a verdict of...
🚨 At his sentencing, John Rideout gave a 45-minute-long speech in which he painted himself as a victim and ranted about fake news, saying, "Donald Trump's right, to a degree." Is it surprising that a convicted rapist idolizes Donald Trump, a man who is also a convicted rapist and openly brags about assaulting women? No, it's not.
CHP 22
For complicated reasons (please read the book!), there had to be a retrial, which means Rideout's latest two victims were forced to relive their trauma in excruciating detail. Brutal.
The good news is...
EPILOGUE
There are too many eyebrow raising quotes in this chapter to include here, but these are a few that made my jaw drop:
Every state has some kind of law that criminalizes spousal rape. But ten of them, as of this writing, still won't prosecute if the victim was unconscious, drugged, or otherwise incapacitated.*
In Virginia, a man charged with raping his wife can get his charges reduced as long as he attends therapy sessions.*
West Virginia only began the process of eliminating its marital rape exemption loopholes for first- and third- degree sexual assault charges in 2024, finalizing a law that went into effect in June of that year.*
*NOTE: Quote(s) taken from an ARC and are subject to change in the final printing.
My heartfelt thanks to the kind people at Ecco Books for providing an ARC of this book.
October 21, 2025
Oh, man. As a true crime junkie, gender studies major/feminist, law and order fan, and someone working marginally in the law field, this book checked SEVERAL boxes.
The author (I believe is; so) writes like a journalist, so this is lovely and interesting to read. The storytelling is captivating. There were times I wish it could have gone a bit faster, admittedly, but there is just SO much history to be learned. It felt like a good solid university read.
It really made me think about what the women of my parents' generation had to go through. I’ll never say it out loud, but I should probably be more forgiving of boomer women for what they tolerate in men of that generation. They really were forced to just accept everything those men did to them.
I was shocked to discover how woefully behind we still are as a country. I was sure that we did in fact have a federal law against spousal rape (spoiler alert?? WE DON’T). While all states do, several apparently have loopholes and contingencies that still permit it! I am so hoping that this book makes huge waves and the issue gets revisited when we get a sane administration. While we’re at it, let's release those files, shall we??
The author (I believe is; so) writes like a journalist, so this is lovely and interesting to read. The storytelling is captivating. There were times I wish it could have gone a bit faster, admittedly, but there is just SO much history to be learned. It felt like a good solid university read.
It really made me think about what the women of my parents' generation had to go through. I’ll never say it out loud, but I should probably be more forgiving of boomer women for what they tolerate in men of that generation. They really were forced to just accept everything those men did to them.
I was shocked to discover how woefully behind we still are as a country. I was sure that we did in fact have a federal law against spousal rape (spoiler alert?? WE DON’T). While all states do, several apparently have loopholes and contingencies that still permit it! I am so hoping that this book makes huge waves and the issue gets revisited when we get a sane administration. While we’re at it, let's release those files, shall we??
October 30, 2025
It is odd when I want to treat a history book as having spoilers, but what happens here in fact and as it is structured as a book is designed to surprise. It is designed to do so in what happens, but the sort of premise of looking back at a world that failed to consider spousal rape as criminal is itself meant to shock.
You could say that this is a book about the history of rape within a marriage becoming a crime in the United States, but it is still not a crime, not federally.
The book is focused on Oregon v. Rideout, a 1978 trial that was one of the first trials (and the first major trial) under a spousal rape criminal statute. This would give it a celebrity status, making the trial a major public event with talk show appearances and a made-for-TV movie.
The facts of the Rideout case are not simple. Or they are simple, but the story frustrates the narrative, a conflict between what we expect from stories, such as in fiction, and the messy way that they are in real life with real people. This reverberates with why the question of spousal rape as a possible crime was contentious in the first place. The imagination of what marriage is in an ideological sense does not comport with the actual violence done to people.
This is sort of the book's problem, in that the focus is so much on the case, and what comes afterwards, and what continues to come, that there is not a broader look at the topic. But this is no real complaint, in that it makes the book much more captivating and readable. The only other problem is something that author cannot do anything about, namely those people who are involved who will not (and sometimes cannot) comment on what happened.
You can see the Netflix documentary. I mean that in a good way.
My thanks to the author, Sarah Weinman, for writing the book, and to the publisher, Ecco, for making the ARC available to me.
You could say that this is a book about the history of rape within a marriage becoming a crime in the United States, but it is still not a crime, not federally.
The book is focused on Oregon v. Rideout, a 1978 trial that was one of the first trials (and the first major trial) under a spousal rape criminal statute. This would give it a celebrity status, making the trial a major public event with talk show appearances and a made-for-TV movie.
The facts of the Rideout case are not simple. Or they are simple, but the story frustrates the narrative, a conflict between what we expect from stories, such as in fiction, and the messy way that they are in real life with real people. This reverberates with why the question of spousal rape as a possible crime was contentious in the first place. The imagination of what marriage is in an ideological sense does not comport with the actual violence done to people.
This is sort of the book's problem, in that the focus is so much on the case, and what comes afterwards, and what continues to come, that there is not a broader look at the topic. But this is no real complaint, in that it makes the book much more captivating and readable. The only other problem is something that author cannot do anything about, namely those people who are involved who will not (and sometimes cannot) comment on what happened.
You can see the Netflix documentary. I mean that in a good way.
My thanks to the author, Sarah Weinman, for writing the book, and to the publisher, Ecco, for making the ARC available to me.
November 27, 2025
A compelling read about an important and too-long overlooked issue: marital rape. Weinman does an admirable job of investigation, detailing the long struggle to have courts designate this a crime.
With excerpts from news accounts as well as interviews, Weinman shows how progress was finally made with some landmark court decisions, and highlights how much work still needs to be done.
She devotes chapters to the decisive (and sometimes undecisive) court cases, most notably the multiple hearings regarding Greta and John Rideout, as well as the Bobbitt case.
Spotlighted are general long-held beliefs that wives are property and thus husbands can't be convicted of raping their wives. Consent is always assumed. It took an especially long time to change public and judicial opinion on this matter, and Weinman also designates the trailblazers for marital rights, including Laura X and others.
What disgusted me and seems obvious is how despicable a person John Rideout is, and how he was able to evade conviction across several decades.
One of the better true crime books I have recently read. I received a copy through a Goodreads giveaway. Thanks to the author and publisher for an advanced review copy, without obligation. My review is completely voluntary.
With excerpts from news accounts as well as interviews, Weinman shows how progress was finally made with some landmark court decisions, and highlights how much work still needs to be done.
She devotes chapters to the decisive (and sometimes undecisive) court cases, most notably the multiple hearings regarding Greta and John Rideout, as well as the Bobbitt case.
Spotlighted are general long-held beliefs that wives are property and thus husbands can't be convicted of raping their wives. Consent is always assumed. It took an especially long time to change public and judicial opinion on this matter, and Weinman also designates the trailblazers for marital rights, including Laura X and others.
What disgusted me and seems obvious is how despicable a person John Rideout is, and how he was able to evade conviction across several decades.
One of the better true crime books I have recently read. I received a copy through a Goodreads giveaway. Thanks to the author and publisher for an advanced review copy, without obligation. My review is completely voluntary.
November 17, 2025
3.0 Stars
I found the topic intriguing but I found the actual discussion over simplified without enough of a deep dive which was disappointing given the complexity of this issue.
I found the topic intriguing but I found the actual discussion over simplified without enough of a deep dive which was disappointing given the complexity of this issue.
November 6, 2025
An important read about the Greta spousal rape trial in the U.S., which unfolded in an Oregon courtroom. In 1978, Greta Rideout accused her husband John Rideout of spousal rape. He said it was consensual. At that time spousal rape was considered a crime in only four states. He was acquitted. But even beyond all this, the central debate and discussion was whether spousal rape could be considered as such if a couple was married and together vs having filed for a divorce, separated, or living apart - amazingly ridiculous. The book also includes other cases, advocacy, and the slow progress to change the laws across the country. Not to diminish the importance of the topic but focusing solely on a review of this book, while I found the book informative and an important read, it didn’t feel as riveting as it could have been. I felt the writing was a bit choppy, the transitions between cases/examples a bit abrupt, and could have been more in depth in some sections. Overall, it was a 3.5 star read for me rounded up to 4. I would still recommend the book for the importance of the topic. Many thanks to the author, publisher, and NetGalley for the opportunity to read and review this book.
August 3, 2025
Book Review: Without Consent: A Landmark Trial and the Decades-Long Struggle to Make Spousal Rape a Crime by Sarah Weinman
Rating: 5/5
A Sociological and Public Health Landmark
Sarah Weinman’s Without Consent is a seminal work of feminist legal history and public health scholarship, meticulously reconstructing the 1978 Oregon v. Rideout trial—the first major spousal rape case in U.S. history—and its reverberations through decades of activism. Weinman, acclaimed for her masterpieces of true crime (Scoundrel, The Real Lolita), here transcends genre to deliver a serious social history that exposes how legal systems institutionalized misogyny by exempting marital rape from prosecution until as late as 1993. Her archival rigor and interviews with survivors, including Greta Rideout herself, reveal the intersection of gender-based violence, public health crises, and legislative inertia.
Emotional Resonance and Personal Reflections
Reading Without Consent felt like witnessing a tectonic shift in slow motion. Weinman’s account of Greta Rideout’s vilification—lambasted for daring to accuse her husband, John, while he was acquitted and later reoffended—triggered visceral outrage. The courtroom scenes, where defense attorneys framed rape as the risk of being married, mirrored contemporary debates about bodily autonomy post-Roe. As a public health practitioner, I was struck by Weinman’s unflinching analysis of how delayed legal recognition of marital rape compounded trauma, fostering cycles of abuse with measurable health impacts (e.g., PTSD, chronic pain). Yet, the book’s most profound moments came in quieter passages: feminist activists’ state-by-state battles, often waged alongside survivors, revealed the grit required to dismantle systemic oppression.
Constructive Criticism
- Structural Intersectionality: While Weinman centers white middle-class experiences (Rideout’s case), deeper engagement with how race and class shaped access to justice—e.g., Black women’s historical exclusion from marital privilege legal defenses—would strengthen the analysis.
- Public Health Data: The book’s sociological lens is impeccable, but incorporating longitudinal studies on spousal rape’s health outcomes (e.g., CDC reports on intimate partner violence) could amplify its policy relevance.
- Contemporary Parallels: Though Weinman nods to post-Roe backlash, explicit ties to current reproductive coercion cases (e.g., abortion bans as bodily autonomy violations) would sharpen the call to action.
Summary Takeaways:
- The Silent Spring of gender-based violence—a watershed exposé of how laws weaponized marriage.
- Weinman doesn’t just document history; she holds a mirror to America’s ongoing war on women’s bodies.
- For readers of She Said and Invisible Women: A forensic reckoning with rape culture’s legal roots.
- Greta Rideout’s name belongs beside Anita Hill’s in the canon of feminist courage.
- A public health imperative wrapped in a legal thriller—unputdownable and unforgettable.
Gratitude
Thank you to Edelweiss and HarperCollins for the advance copy. Weinman’s important and impressive work is a clarion call for scholars and activists alike.
Final Verdict: A flawless fusion of narrative journalism and sociological critique, essential for understanding how law, health, and gender intersect.
Why Read It? To confront Weinman’s implicit challenge: When rights are pendulums, not foundations, who pays the price?
Rating: 5/5
A Sociological and Public Health Landmark
Sarah Weinman’s Without Consent is a seminal work of feminist legal history and public health scholarship, meticulously reconstructing the 1978 Oregon v. Rideout trial—the first major spousal rape case in U.S. history—and its reverberations through decades of activism. Weinman, acclaimed for her masterpieces of true crime (Scoundrel, The Real Lolita), here transcends genre to deliver a serious social history that exposes how legal systems institutionalized misogyny by exempting marital rape from prosecution until as late as 1993. Her archival rigor and interviews with survivors, including Greta Rideout herself, reveal the intersection of gender-based violence, public health crises, and legislative inertia.
Emotional Resonance and Personal Reflections
Reading Without Consent felt like witnessing a tectonic shift in slow motion. Weinman’s account of Greta Rideout’s vilification—lambasted for daring to accuse her husband, John, while he was acquitted and later reoffended—triggered visceral outrage. The courtroom scenes, where defense attorneys framed rape as the risk of being married, mirrored contemporary debates about bodily autonomy post-Roe. As a public health practitioner, I was struck by Weinman’s unflinching analysis of how delayed legal recognition of marital rape compounded trauma, fostering cycles of abuse with measurable health impacts (e.g., PTSD, chronic pain). Yet, the book’s most profound moments came in quieter passages: feminist activists’ state-by-state battles, often waged alongside survivors, revealed the grit required to dismantle systemic oppression.
Constructive Criticism
- Structural Intersectionality: While Weinman centers white middle-class experiences (Rideout’s case), deeper engagement with how race and class shaped access to justice—e.g., Black women’s historical exclusion from marital privilege legal defenses—would strengthen the analysis.
- Public Health Data: The book’s sociological lens is impeccable, but incorporating longitudinal studies on spousal rape’s health outcomes (e.g., CDC reports on intimate partner violence) could amplify its policy relevance.
- Contemporary Parallels: Though Weinman nods to post-Roe backlash, explicit ties to current reproductive coercion cases (e.g., abortion bans as bodily autonomy violations) would sharpen the call to action.
Summary Takeaways:
- The Silent Spring of gender-based violence—a watershed exposé of how laws weaponized marriage.
- Weinman doesn’t just document history; she holds a mirror to America’s ongoing war on women’s bodies.
- For readers of She Said and Invisible Women: A forensic reckoning with rape culture’s legal roots.
- Greta Rideout’s name belongs beside Anita Hill’s in the canon of feminist courage.
- A public health imperative wrapped in a legal thriller—unputdownable and unforgettable.
Gratitude
Thank you to Edelweiss and HarperCollins for the advance copy. Weinman’s important and impressive work is a clarion call for scholars and activists alike.
Final Verdict: A flawless fusion of narrative journalism and sociological critique, essential for understanding how law, health, and gender intersect.
Why Read It? To confront Weinman’s implicit challenge: When rights are pendulums, not foundations, who pays the price?
October 7, 2025
If you've ever wanted to read good journalism, here you are...Sarah Weinman is the best of the best...her work is 'above and beyond' the usual...
'Without Consent...' is an excellent example of her work...the best investigatory work I've ever read...
This is a story that needs telling...and the persistent investigation into this story and the aftermath...and subsequent court rulings...is just amazing...
Highly Recommended!
August 11, 2025
Without Consent is a searing, essential work of true crime and feminist history, bringing urgent attention to the first major spousal rape trial in the United States and the decades-long fight it ignited. Sarah Weinman unearths the story of Greta Rideout with unflinching clarity, exposing a justice system steeped in misogyny and a culture determined to silence women. Meticulously researched and powerfully told, this is required reading for anyone seeking to understand how recent, and fragile, our legal protections truly are.
September 28, 2025
Just finished this book on the Oregon v. Rideout case — the first time in the U.S. a husband was tried for raping his wife — and wow… it’s heavy, but it needs to be read.
What shocked me most is how recent some of these legal loopholes were. States only closed exemptions for spousal rape in the last few years. And even now, we’re watching rights roll back: Roe v. Wade overturned, debates over no-fault divorce, even contraception and LGBTQ+ rights under attack. It feels like history echoing right in front of us.
This isn’t just about one trial in 1978. It’s about how fragile progress is. Survivors like Greta Rideout, Laura X, Teresa Hern, and Sheila Moxley fought like hell to be heard when the system tried to silence them. Their courage literally changed laws.
Reading this reminded me: rights aren’t permanent. Justice isn’t guaranteed. And silence only helps abusers.
Uncomfortable? Absolutely. Necessary? More than ever.
What shocked me most is how recent some of these legal loopholes were. States only closed exemptions for spousal rape in the last few years. And even now, we’re watching rights roll back: Roe v. Wade overturned, debates over no-fault divorce, even contraception and LGBTQ+ rights under attack. It feels like history echoing right in front of us.
This isn’t just about one trial in 1978. It’s about how fragile progress is. Survivors like Greta Rideout, Laura X, Teresa Hern, and Sheila Moxley fought like hell to be heard when the system tried to silence them. Their courage literally changed laws.
Reading this reminded me: rights aren’t permanent. Justice isn’t guaranteed. And silence only helps abusers.
Uncomfortable? Absolutely. Necessary? More than ever.
August 31, 2025
"Rather than the unfortunate crack by the California state senator Bob Wilson that 'If you can't rape your wife, who can you rape?,' the question that must be asked, again and again, is 'If you can rape your wife, who else can you rape?' As the Rideout cases, in 1978, 2017, and 2022, illustrate all too well, the answer is that you can keep on raping women."
This was an incredibly well-researched and engaging book about a difficult topic. I often have a hard time with non-fiction books because they tend to be a string of facts and background and lack a broader narrative. This book is an example of a non-fiction book that tells a linear story with an excellent narrative in an engaging way.
The book starts with the background of the initial Rideout trial, goes on to the subsequent legal battles and marital rape cases across the country, and ends with the further crimes committed by John Rideout after the first case.
I was given the book for free after winning a Goodreads giveaway.
This was an incredibly well-researched and engaging book about a difficult topic. I often have a hard time with non-fiction books because they tend to be a string of facts and background and lack a broader narrative. This book is an example of a non-fiction book that tells a linear story with an excellent narrative in an engaging way.
The book starts with the background of the initial Rideout trial, goes on to the subsequent legal battles and marital rape cases across the country, and ends with the further crimes committed by John Rideout after the first case.
I was given the book for free after winning a Goodreads giveaway.
September 14, 2025
Powerful story of Greta Rideout, who in 1978 charged her husband with rape. Though it took nearly 2 decades for spousal rape to be illegal in all 50 states, Hideout spoke up first.
I received an ARC from netgalley in exchange for an honest review
I received an ARC from netgalley in exchange for an honest review
Read
December 2, 2025
Sơ Đồ 3-4-3 Hiện Đại Và 4-3-3 Truyền Thống
Trong thế giới bóng đá hiện đại, chiến thuật là linh hồn quyết định thành bại của một trận đấu. Chúng tôi hiểu rằng, đối với người hâm mộ, việc giải mã những sơ đồ phức tạp trên sân cỏ cũng hấp dẫn không kém việc thưởng thức một bàn thắng đẹp. Tại xoilac trực tiếp bóng đá, chúng tôi không chỉ mang đến những trận cầu đỉnh cao mà còn đi sâu vào phân tích chuyên môn. Hôm nay, chúng ta sẽ cùng nhau mổ xẻ hai hệ thống chiến thuật đang làm mưa làm gió: Sơ Đồ 3-4-3 Hiện Đại Và 4-3-3 Truyền Thống. Đây là cuộc đối đầu giữa hai triết lý, hai phong cách định hình nên bộ mặt của bóng đá đỉnh cao.
Mục tiêu của chúng tôi là cung cấp một cái nhìn toàn diện, giúp bạn không chỉ xem bóng đá mà còn "đọc" được trận đấu. Hãy cùng các chuyên gia của chúng tôi khám phá những ưu, nhược điểm và sự khác biệt cốt lõi giữa hai sơ đồ này để hiểu tại sao chúng lại được các huấn luyện viên hàng đầu thế giới tin dùng.
Sơ Đồ 3-4-3: "Cơn Lốc" Tấn Công Với Sức Ép Nghẹt ThởSơ đồ 3-4-3 đã trở thành một biểu tượng của lối chơi tấn công tổng lực và pressing tầm cao. Hệ thống này đòi hỏi sự linh hoạt, tốc độ và nền tảng thể lực dồi dào từ các cầu thủ. Chúng tôi nhận thấy rằng khi được vận hành trơn tru, 3-4-3 có thể bóp nghẹt đối thủ ngay từ phần sân nhà của họ.
Triết lý vận hành và sức mạnh cốt lõiNền tảng của sơ đồ 3-4-3 nằm ở khả năng tạo ra sự áp đảo về quân số ở cả hai biên và khu vực trung lộ. Với ba trung vệ án ngữ phía sau, hai tiền vệ cánh (wing-back) được giải phóng khỏi nhiệm vụ phòng ngự thuần túy, cho phép họ dâng cao như những tiền đạo cánh thực thụ. Điều này tạo ra một hàng công có thể lên tới 5 người, gây ra sức ép khủng khiếp và liên tục lên hàng phòng ngự đối phương. Cặp tiền vệ trung tâm có nhiệm vụ điều tiết nhịp độ và là cầu nối giữa các tuyến.
Ưu điểm tạo nên sự khác biệtƯu điểm lớn nhất của sơ đồ này là khả năng tấn công đa dạng và khó lường. Các wing-back liên tục khuấy đảo hai hành lang biên, trong khi bộ ba tiền đạo có thể hoán đổi vị trí linh hoạt, tìm kiếm khoảng trống. Hơn nữa, cự ly đội hình gần nhau giúp việc triển khai pressing tầm cao trở nên cực kỳ hiệu quả. Khi mất bóng, đội hình có thể nhanh chóng vây ráp, đoạt lại quyền kiểm soát và chuyển đổi trạng thái sang tấn công một cách chớp nhoáng.
Sơ Đồ 4-3-3: Biểu Tượng Của Sự Cân Bằng Và Kiểm SoátTrái ngược với sự táo bạo của 3-4-3, sơ đồ 4-3-3 truyền thống lại là hiện thân của sự cân bằng, ổn định và khả năng kiểm soát thế trận. Đây là hệ thống được nhiều đội bóng lớn ưa chuộng bởi nó tạo ra một cấu trúc vững chắc từ phòng ngự đến tấn công, đặt nền tảng cho lối chơi kiểm soát bóng.
Nền tảng của sự ổn địnhSức mạnh của 4-3-3 đến từ bộ ba tiền vệ ở khu vực trung tâm. Thường sẽ có một tiền vệ mỏ neo (số 6) chuyên trách nhiệm vụ phòng ngự, đánh chặn, và hai tiền vệ trung tâm (số 8) linh hoạt hơn, vừa hỗ trợ phòng ngự vừa tham gia tổ chức tấn công. Tam tấu này tạo ra một "tam giác" vững chắc, cho phép đội bóng kiểm soát khu vực giữa sân, từ đó áp đặt lối chơi lên đối thủ. Trên hàng công, hai tiền đạo cánh và một trung phong cắm tạo nên mối đe dọa thường trực.
Điểm mạnh trong kiểm soát và tấn côngSơ đồ 4-3-3 mang lại sự cân bằng tuyệt vời giữa các tuyến. Bốn hậu vệ tạo ra một lá chắn an toàn trước khung thành. Ba tiền vệ đảm bảo khả năng luân chuyển bóng mượt mà và kiểm soát nhịp độ trận đấu. Khi tấn công, các hậu vệ biên có thể dâng cao hỗ trợ, tạo ra các tình huống chồng biên nguy hiểm. Sự ổn định này giúp các đội bóng vận hành 4-3-3 ít bị tổn thương hơn trước các pha phản công nhanh của đối thủ.
Đặt Lên Bàn Cân: Sơ Đồ 3-4-3 Hiện Đại Và 4-3-3 Truyền ThốngKhi hai hệ thống chiến thuật này đối đầu trực tiếp, đó là một cuộc đấu trí thực sự giữa các huấn luyện viên. Mỗi sơ đồ đều có cách để khai thác điểm yếu của đối phương. Theo dõi các trận đấu tại xoilac trực tiếp bóng đá, chúng tôi đã đúc kết được những màn đối đầu chiến thuật kinh điển.
Cuộc chiến ở khu vực trung tuyến và hai biênTrong một cuộc đối đầu trực diện, sơ đồ 4-3-3 với ba tiền vệ trung tâm có thể chiếm ưu thế về quân số ở khu vực giữa sân so với hai tiền vệ của 3-4-3. Tuy nhiên, hệ thống 3-4-3 lại có thể khắc chế điều này bằng cách kéo các tiền đạo lùi sâu hoặc để các wing-back bó vào trong. Ngược lại, điểm yếu chí mạng của 3-4-3 là khoảng trống mênh mông phía sau lưng hai wing-back khi họ dâng cao. Đây chính là "miếng mồi ngon" để hai tiền đạo cánh tốc độ của sơ đồ 4-3-3 khai thác.
Yếu tố con người là chìa khóaKhông có sơ đồ nào là hoàn hảo tuyệt đối. Sự thành công của một hệ thống chiến thuật phụ thuộc hoàn toàn vào những cầu thủ trên sân. Sơ đồ 3-4-3 đòi hỏi những wing-back toàn diện "lên công về thủ" và những trung vệ thông minh, đọc tình huống tốt. Trong khi đó, 4-3-3 cần một tiền vệ mỏ neo đẳng cấp thế giới để làm tấm lá chắn và những tiền vệ trung tâm sáng tạo để làm bóng cho hàng công. Việc lựa chọn sơ đồ nào phụ thuộc vào triết lý của huấn luyện viên và đặc điểm của các cầu thủ mà họ có trong tay.
Lời kếtCuộc đối đầu giữa Sơ Đồ 3-4-3 Hiện Đại Và 4-3-3 Truyền Thống sẽ không bao giờ có hồi kết, bởi đó là bản chất của sự phát triển không ngừng trong bóng đá. Mỗi hệ thống đều đại diện cho một triết lý riêng và mang lại những vẻ đẹp khác nhau cho môn thể thao vua. Chúng tôi tại xoilac trực tiếp bóng đá hy vọng rằng qua bài phân tích này, quý vị khán giả đã có cái nhìn sâu sắc hơn về thế giới chiến thuật phức tạp nhưng đầy hấp dẫn. Việc hiểu rõ những toan tính đằng sau mỗi trận đấu chắc chắn sẽ làm tăng thêm sự phấn khích khi bạn theo dõi những cuộc thư hùng đỉnh cao.
August 5, 2025
This was a fantastic example of a book that’s been well researched and edited. I knew nothing about spousal rape laws in America, nor about the first one happening in my own home state. Weinman recounts everything in such detail, but without boring the reader. I felt that there was just the right level of emotion and education in this book for it to work. I learned so much about law, legislation and survival. A really remarkable book, testament to the women who survived and the ones who are trying to ensure no one else is a victim.
Thank you to Edelweiss and the publishers for kindly providing an ARC in exchange for an honest review. #WithoutConsent #Edelweiss. All opinions are my own.
Thank you to Edelweiss and the publishers for kindly providing an ARC in exchange for an honest review. #WithoutConsent #Edelweiss. All opinions are my own.
August 17, 2025
This is a brilliant and important book. The author discusses the ground-breaking trial of John Rideout in 1978. His wife, Greta, accused him of rape, something that was not considered a crime at that point.
The author goes on to explain how the laws worked previously, that a woman basically gave permanent consent when she married.
I learned about various other cases of spousal rape and about how laws moved through the various states' legislatures.
This book was never dry or boring and it should serve as a reminder that legal protection for married women was only put in place less than 50 years ago.
*ARC provided by Edelweiss+*
The author goes on to explain how the laws worked previously, that a woman basically gave permanent consent when she married.
I learned about various other cases of spousal rape and about how laws moved through the various states' legislatures.
This book was never dry or boring and it should serve as a reminder that legal protection for married women was only put in place less than 50 years ago.
*ARC provided by Edelweiss+*
November 11, 2025
Everyone needs to read this book. Plain and simple.
In the light of what is happening in the United States, Without Consent contains information that the population ought to know. The disgusting actions taken on this undeserving person had me wanting to put the book down. I wouldn't do that. This survivor didn't just get to close the book and come back to it if they got uncomfortable. They fought for their autonomy and the autonomy of fellow spouses. Read this book and recommend it to other readers. Including family and friends. Stay informed so we keep these laws that were created from the struggles of this strong individual.
In the light of what is happening in the United States, Without Consent contains information that the population ought to know. The disgusting actions taken on this undeserving person had me wanting to put the book down. I wouldn't do that. This survivor didn't just get to close the book and come back to it if they got uncomfortable. They fought for their autonomy and the autonomy of fellow spouses. Read this book and recommend it to other readers. Including family and friends. Stay informed so we keep these laws that were created from the struggles of this strong individual.
November 16, 2025
Having spent the greater part of my 50-year legal career in the criminal justice system, I can confidently say that WITHOUT CONSENT is a remarkable historical account of a criminal case that created a national sensation and led to debates on legal issues impacting the lives of women in America for centuries. Sarah Weinman is the Crime & Mystery columnist for the New York Times Book Review and publishes a newsletter, The Crime Lady, that covers both crime fiction and true crime.
Books examining significant trials are often noteworthy as the legal case itself is not the end of the discussion but only the beginning. One might think of SIMPLE JUSTICE by Richard Kluger, which tells the history of both Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights era in our nation. A CIVIL ACTION is not simply the story of a single environmental case in Massachusetts. In the hands of Jonathan Harr, it becomes a book about the practice of law in America.
WITHOUT CONSENT is similar in scope and style to these exceptional works in its treatment of Oregon v. Rideout, a case that for a moment in time was hotly debated and aggressively reported but is now little remembered. Weinman begins with an examination of the lives of Greta and John Rideout before the morning when Greta would walk into a Salem, Oregon police station intending to file charges against her husband for rape.
The trial, which gained national attention, occupies only 32 pages of the 260-page book. After the trial, the Rideouts enjoyed a brief flash of celebrity, to a large degree because of their reconciliation. More importantly, Weinman chronicles how the aftermath of the case, through the work of many activists, brought change to criminal justice in almost every state in America.
In 1978, only four states recognized “marital rape” as a crime. The belief that a husband could not force his wife to have sexual relations was a link in a long historical chain of how women and marriage were viewed in society. This notion was not prevalent in just the United States. A husband could not be charged with the rape of his wife in England, Australia and most of Europe. That is even the case in many countries today.
It was not until the ’60s and ’70s when constitutional rights began to flow to women, and they could become independent of their husbands. As a result of this newly recognized freedom, the issue of marital rape reached the public. As Weinman notes in her introduction, a crucial irony was present here: “the belief and centuries-old legal precedent that a man can’t rape his wife is the very thing that means a man can, in fact, rape his wife and get away with it.”
WITHOUT CONSENT is a thoughtful and exhaustive discussion of a historical legal movement that changed law and gender politics. It also brings attention to the damaging and inherent misogyny of American culture that existed for centuries and sadly continues. Even as this book allows us to consider our history, there are many who would ignore that history and continue in the mistaken belief that wives are “property.”
Reviewed by Stuart Shiffman
Books examining significant trials are often noteworthy as the legal case itself is not the end of the discussion but only the beginning. One might think of SIMPLE JUSTICE by Richard Kluger, which tells the history of both Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights era in our nation. A CIVIL ACTION is not simply the story of a single environmental case in Massachusetts. In the hands of Jonathan Harr, it becomes a book about the practice of law in America.
WITHOUT CONSENT is similar in scope and style to these exceptional works in its treatment of Oregon v. Rideout, a case that for a moment in time was hotly debated and aggressively reported but is now little remembered. Weinman begins with an examination of the lives of Greta and John Rideout before the morning when Greta would walk into a Salem, Oregon police station intending to file charges against her husband for rape.
The trial, which gained national attention, occupies only 32 pages of the 260-page book. After the trial, the Rideouts enjoyed a brief flash of celebrity, to a large degree because of their reconciliation. More importantly, Weinman chronicles how the aftermath of the case, through the work of many activists, brought change to criminal justice in almost every state in America.
In 1978, only four states recognized “marital rape” as a crime. The belief that a husband could not force his wife to have sexual relations was a link in a long historical chain of how women and marriage were viewed in society. This notion was not prevalent in just the United States. A husband could not be charged with the rape of his wife in England, Australia and most of Europe. That is even the case in many countries today.
It was not until the ’60s and ’70s when constitutional rights began to flow to women, and they could become independent of their husbands. As a result of this newly recognized freedom, the issue of marital rape reached the public. As Weinman notes in her introduction, a crucial irony was present here: “the belief and centuries-old legal precedent that a man can’t rape his wife is the very thing that means a man can, in fact, rape his wife and get away with it.”
WITHOUT CONSENT is a thoughtful and exhaustive discussion of a historical legal movement that changed law and gender politics. It also brings attention to the damaging and inherent misogyny of American culture that existed for centuries and sadly continues. Even as this book allows us to consider our history, there are many who would ignore that history and continue in the mistaken belief that wives are “property.”
Reviewed by Stuart Shiffman
September 27, 2025
I received a copy of this book for free in a Goodreads giveaway.
This book covers spousal rape, a topic that I wouldn't have even known about if I did not watch Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. The book describes the history of spousal rape in an understandable way and explains that it's treated differently from other rape cases, while also showing why it doesn't even make sense to treat spousal rape differently. The author goes into detail about Greta Rideout, the first woman in the United States to accuse her own husband of rape, and the case she brought against her husband, John Rideout. It does a great job of showing how US law has severely limited the rights of spouses who are victims of rape by their own spouse, and how this has led to tragic outcomes. At the same time, it meanders away from the Rideout case for quite a while, despite spending a lot of time setting it up, before finally going back to some tragic consequences.
It is shocking to learn that the first spousal rape case in the United States didn't happen until as late as 1978, and even then, in most states, a man could not be convicted for raping his wife. The book does a good job showing this injustice, how sexist attitudes have shaped the law in this way, and how people like Greta Rideout and others who are victims of their husbands are unfairly harassed and vilified. It also talks about the history of activists that have helped bring laws all over the country to where they are now, where spousal rape is mostly treated the same way as other rapes.
The book does seem to lose a bit of focus as it moves away from Greta's case and onto other spousal rape cases, where there's not nearly as much background on the couple, after having gone into so much detail about both Greta's and John's lives before and after marriage. It meanders even further when detailing more trials later in John Rideout's life that have nothing to do with Greta or even spousal rape. I suppose that the author may be showing that had Greta's rape been properly prosecuted at the time, that future tragedies may have been prevented, but by giving so much space to courtroom scenes that don't even involve spousal rape at all, the book seems to stray from its stated focus.
But overall, I found the book to be very effective in detailing the history of a crime that's not often discussed specifically, and how societal prejudices and sexism have contributed to some of the unfortunate events described in the book. I do wish it had a stronger focus on the couple it spends so much time on from the beginning, instead of also tacking on brief mentions of other couples and even non-spousal rape cases.
This book covers spousal rape, a topic that I wouldn't have even known about if I did not watch Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. The book describes the history of spousal rape in an understandable way and explains that it's treated differently from other rape cases, while also showing why it doesn't even make sense to treat spousal rape differently. The author goes into detail about Greta Rideout, the first woman in the United States to accuse her own husband of rape, and the case she brought against her husband, John Rideout. It does a great job of showing how US law has severely limited the rights of spouses who are victims of rape by their own spouse, and how this has led to tragic outcomes. At the same time, it meanders away from the Rideout case for quite a while, despite spending a lot of time setting it up, before finally going back to some tragic consequences.
It is shocking to learn that the first spousal rape case in the United States didn't happen until as late as 1978, and even then, in most states, a man could not be convicted for raping his wife. The book does a good job showing this injustice, how sexist attitudes have shaped the law in this way, and how people like Greta Rideout and others who are victims of their husbands are unfairly harassed and vilified. It also talks about the history of activists that have helped bring laws all over the country to where they are now, where spousal rape is mostly treated the same way as other rapes.
The book does seem to lose a bit of focus as it moves away from Greta's case and onto other spousal rape cases, where there's not nearly as much background on the couple, after having gone into so much detail about both Greta's and John's lives before and after marriage. It meanders even further when detailing more trials later in John Rideout's life that have nothing to do with Greta or even spousal rape. I suppose that the author may be showing that had Greta's rape been properly prosecuted at the time, that future tragedies may have been prevented, but by giving so much space to courtroom scenes that don't even involve spousal rape at all, the book seems to stray from its stated focus.
But overall, I found the book to be very effective in detailing the history of a crime that's not often discussed specifically, and how societal prejudices and sexism have contributed to some of the unfortunate events described in the book. I do wish it had a stronger focus on the couple it spends so much time on from the beginning, instead of also tacking on brief mentions of other couples and even non-spousal rape cases.
November 19, 2025
4/5
Jei paklausčiau kada, jūsų manymu, JAV įvyko pirmasis teismas, žmonai apkaltinus sutuoktinį išprievartavimu, turbūt į galvą šautų visokios datos prieš daaaaugybę metų. Tačiau tiesa ta, kad pirmasis toks teismas įvyko vos 1978-aisiais ir, kaip turbūt galite įsivaizduoti, jis atnešė nebent daugybę skausmo ir siaubo, bet ne teisingumą. Nuo to laiko praėjo vos 47-eri metai (vienas iš sutuoktinių, beje, dar gyvas) bet kas pasikeitė? Autorė kalba ne tik apie šią vieną bylą, bet ir apie laikotarpį po to: su kokiais iššūkiais susidūrė kitos aukos, kaip keitėsi (ar keitėsi?) teisinė sistema ir požiūris į šią siaubingą problemą, o ir kaip ir kodėl sutuoktinis, kaltintas pirmojoje byloje dėl išprievartavimo santuokoje, vėl atsidūrė kaltinamųjų suole. Norit spėti, kaip ir kodėl?
Pati knyga, nekalbant apie temos reikšmingumą, nėra parašyta baisiai įtraukiančiai, bet su žurnalistiniais tyrimais, ypač tokiais, kuriuose reikia susisteminti daug teisinės informacijos, taip jau nutinka. Patiko, kaip autorė pateikė istorinį kontekstą, kiek papasakojo skirtingų istorijų, kurios tik iš pirmo žvilgsnio gali atrodyti nebaisiai susijusios su pagrindine tema ir pagrindine nukentėjusia. Bet manau, kad tiems, kurie gilinasi į seksualinių nusikaltimų temą, šioks toks teksto sausumas nesutrukdys. Tik kad aišku, beklausant sunku savas emocijas pastumti į šoną. Galiu pasakyti, kad jei tikit tuo, kad gaminti reikia tik su meile, šitos knygos gamindami neklausykit - bo didesnio įtūžio kaip kad iš manęs, varškėtukų tešla tikrai šitam pasauly nėra mačius.
Jei paklausčiau kada, jūsų manymu, JAV įvyko pirmasis teismas, žmonai apkaltinus sutuoktinį išprievartavimu, turbūt į galvą šautų visokios datos prieš daaaaugybę metų. Tačiau tiesa ta, kad pirmasis toks teismas įvyko vos 1978-aisiais ir, kaip turbūt galite įsivaizduoti, jis atnešė nebent daugybę skausmo ir siaubo, bet ne teisingumą. Nuo to laiko praėjo vos 47-eri metai (vienas iš sutuoktinių, beje, dar gyvas) bet kas pasikeitė? Autorė kalba ne tik apie šią vieną bylą, bet ir apie laikotarpį po to: su kokiais iššūkiais susidūrė kitos aukos, kaip keitėsi (ar keitėsi?) teisinė sistema ir požiūris į šią siaubingą problemą, o ir kaip ir kodėl sutuoktinis, kaltintas pirmojoje byloje dėl išprievartavimo santuokoje, vėl atsidūrė kaltinamųjų suole. Norit spėti, kaip ir kodėl?
Pati knyga, nekalbant apie temos reikšmingumą, nėra parašyta baisiai įtraukiančiai, bet su žurnalistiniais tyrimais, ypač tokiais, kuriuose reikia susisteminti daug teisinės informacijos, taip jau nutinka. Patiko, kaip autorė pateikė istorinį kontekstą, kiek papasakojo skirtingų istorijų, kurios tik iš pirmo žvilgsnio gali atrodyti nebaisiai susijusios su pagrindine tema ir pagrindine nukentėjusia. Bet manau, kad tiems, kurie gilinasi į seksualinių nusikaltimų temą, šioks toks teksto sausumas nesutrukdys. Tik kad aišku, beklausant sunku savas emocijas pastumti į šoną. Galiu pasakyti, kad jei tikit tuo, kad gaminti reikia tik su meile, šitos knygos gamindami neklausykit - bo didesnio įtūžio kaip kad iš manęs, varškėtukų tešla tikrai šitam pasauly nėra mačius.
December 3, 2025
Did you know that spousal rape wasn’t considered a crime in some states until 1993?
And some judges and other officials still argue that marital rape should be exempt from the law, even as recently as 2024.
What the hell?
When I started reading Without Consent by Sarah Weinman, I expected to be about an antiquated idea.
The book centers around the Oregon vs. Rideout trial in 1978, when a woman accused her husband of beating and raping her.
At that time, the man was acquitted, but the trial began a decades-long battle over the concept of marital rape.
The question: “Can a husband rape his wife, or is consent assumed by marriage?”
Are you fucking kidding me?
Does marriage make partners one another’s property?
Without Consent details cases where, time and time again, not only did men get away with raping their wives, but wives who took violent measures to protect themselves became criminals.
But perhaps the most interesting (and least surprising) of Weinman’s findings was how many of the men went on to rape someone else.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
And some judges and other officials still argue that marital rape should be exempt from the law, even as recently as 2024.
What the hell?
When I started reading Without Consent by Sarah Weinman, I expected to be about an antiquated idea.
The book centers around the Oregon vs. Rideout trial in 1978, when a woman accused her husband of beating and raping her.
At that time, the man was acquitted, but the trial began a decades-long battle over the concept of marital rape.
The question: “Can a husband rape his wife, or is consent assumed by marriage?”
Are you fucking kidding me?
Does marriage make partners one another’s property?
Without Consent details cases where, time and time again, not only did men get away with raping their wives, but wives who took violent measures to protect themselves became criminals.
But perhaps the most interesting (and least surprising) of Weinman’s findings was how many of the men went on to rape someone else.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
November 21, 2025
I'm not sure if I can put into words how this book made me feel... It was enlightening, heartbreaking, and frustrating all at the same time. The feminist in me was screaming the entire time because I just cannot understand how *anyone* could think a husband has "ownership" of a wife and that it entitles him to do whatever he wants to her. I appreciate Weinman explaining the history of this issue, including where the "ownership" originated from, but I still struggled to wrap my head around it because it's just so morally wrong. I could rant all over this review, but instead I'll just recommend you read Weinman's book. It's a strong investigation into the history of spousal abuse that should hopefully be a bucket of water in the face of anyone who hasn't acknowledged this is a problem, even in today's society.
**Thank you, NetGalley and publisher, for a DRC in exchange for an honest review.**
**Thank you, NetGalley and publisher, for a DRC in exchange for an honest review.**
December 2, 2025
I didn't know anything about the landmark case out of Oregon in 1978 and the reverberations it would have throughout the court system (and abroad) regarding spousal rape. It's made more poignant too with the recent conviction of Gisele Pelicot's former husband and multiple men who raped her when she was incapacitated with drugs at the behest of the husband.
But the first case was with Greta Rideout who said her husband raped her which ultimately went to trial. The story is much more than just the trial but a biography of the Rideouts as well as case law, quotes, and history regarding viewpoints related to spousal rape. The book was not overwritten but balances "the court of popular opinion", the law, and most importantly the people involved in the case in 1978 to present day discussions and what's on the books.
But the first case was with Greta Rideout who said her husband raped her which ultimately went to trial. The story is much more than just the trial but a biography of the Rideouts as well as case law, quotes, and history regarding viewpoints related to spousal rape. The book was not overwritten but balances "the court of popular opinion", the law, and most importantly the people involved in the case in 1978 to present day discussions and what's on the books.
December 4, 2025
“Without Consent” tells the true story of a woman who tried to charge her husband with rape at a time when people didn’t even believe a husband could rape his wife. The book explains the court case and how badly she was treated by the media and the legal system. It felt shocking to read how people used to think about marriage and consent, and it made me realize how unfair the world was and sometimes still is.
Reading it gave me a heavy feeling, but also a sense of respect for how brave she was. The book shows how her case helped push for laws that protect people today, which made me feel a mix of sadness and hope. It wasn’t an easy story, but it left me with the feeling that speaking up, even when it doesn’t change everything right away, still matters.
Reading it gave me a heavy feeling, but also a sense of respect for how brave she was. The book shows how her case helped push for laws that protect people today, which made me feel a mix of sadness and hope. It wasn’t an easy story, but it left me with the feeling that speaking up, even when it doesn’t change everything right away, still matters.
June 24, 2025
I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily. This is a must read! It was fascinating and shocking to learn the history of marital rape and how we got to the place we are in now as women in this country. The author did an amazing job reporting factually everything that happened and certainly showed Greta as the strong woman she is. This was such an eye opening book that I think needs read by everyone in this country. I have always been curious about the history of this topic and the legal pursuits over time so this was a very appreciated book for me.
September 4, 2025
I thought this was important and readable. It felt like the author was unclear of her focus - was this book meant to be about the Rideouts or the history of how spousal rape has been dealt with legally? She goes in both directions, spending time on Lorena Bobbitt as well as John Rideout's later rapes of women he wasn't married to. I also think it could've used more statistics of some sort, like reported rapes or public opinion polls.
November 26, 2025
Your narrative style is beautifully visual, every scene feels like it’s been composed rather than just written. It’s cinematic, emotional, and alive.
As a commissioned artist who makes comics and webtoons, I couldn’t help but imagine how naturally this story would translate into illustrated form.
You’re always welcome to reach out on Instagram (@eve_verse_) or Discord (bennett_lol) if that ever interests you.
As a commissioned artist who makes comics and webtoons, I couldn’t help but imagine how naturally this story would translate into illustrated form.
You’re always welcome to reach out on Instagram (@eve_verse_) or Discord (bennett_lol) if that ever interests you.
November 30, 2025
A landmark trial and the decades-long struggle to make spousal rape a crime. Reading about the first cases being brought to trial on spousal rape it's hard to see anything as cut and dry when the jury learns the victim stayed with the offender, or to deliberate whether marriage gives you an automatic sex pass to anytime you want to whether your partner does or not. I feel for the victims who seem to have a lot of the decision making and body autonomy taken from them.
November 11, 2025
Thanks to Netgalley for the ARC
Without Consent follows John and Greta, the first couple to undergo a trial of martial rape. This book was very informative about the lives of the people surrounding this case and the attempts to overturn any legislation that says a husband cannot rape his wife. I felt the middle of the book dragged a bit but the end tied it all together.
Without Consent follows John and Greta, the first couple to undergo a trial of martial rape. This book was very informative about the lives of the people surrounding this case and the attempts to overturn any legislation that says a husband cannot rape his wife. I felt the middle of the book dragged a bit but the end tied it all together.
November 29, 2025
It is sad how recent the history this book covers and how many people to this day deny the agency and humanity of women by excusing marital rape. The author does a masterful job showing the complexity of this issue within marriages while at the same time showing depravity of those that would excuse it.
November 10, 2025
An incredibly difficult book to read but a necessary look into the changes taking place today when it comes to the rights of women and spouses in America.
Received the book for free after winning a Goodreads giveaway.
Received the book for free after winning a Goodreads giveaway.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews