What is marital rape?

The husband wants sex, the wife isn't too happy about it and gives him clues but he insists. In the end she obliges out of a sense of ''duty'' and because she understands his needs. Is this rape? Should this man be jailed?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

tehforum

Original post by jamieTT

That's not rape.

Just bad sex.

Reply 2

Jessaay!

Original post by jamieTT

If she obliges, as in gives consent, it is not rape.

Do some reading and stop posting nonsensical threads about women/gender etc.

Reply 3

username234673

She has a headache, he gets some anyway.

Seriously though, marital rape is when either partner says "no" and the other partner doesn't listen. Pretty much the same as normal rape, just with the marriage thing going on.

Reply 4

tehforum

Original post by mikeyd85

Precisely.

Basically, marital rape was technically not illegal until

R v R 1991

http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-R-%5B1991%5D.php

Have a read, it's great.

Reply 5

IFoundWonderland

Original post by jamieTT

It's not rape if she obliges. If she doesn't oblige, however, then it is.

http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/maritalrape2.php

Reply 6

The Socktor

Sounds like an abusive relationship, but no, it's not rape.

Reply 7

jamieTT

Original post by Jessaay!

If she obliges, as in gives consent, it is not rape.

Do some reading and stop posting nonsensical threads about women/gender etc.

She obliges because she doesn't see how could she get out of it and doesn't want to make a big deal about it. This is what a lot of feminists call '' yes doesn't always mean yes'', if a woman doesn't agree 100% or she feels coerced it's rape.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/sep/08/gender.uk

To all intents and purposes this was rape. I did not want to have sex with the man and had certainly not given consent. If I appeared to be compliant, it was because I had no option: I was in a foreign city, with enough of the local language to ask directions to the cathedral maybe, but not to search out a reliable protector and explain convincingly what was happening.

If no violence was used, it was because the man's weapon was my own tiredness (a mind set on sleep, rather than watching for the telltale signs of danger) and the luggage. With two heavy cases and a backpack, I couldn't make a dash for it.

Notice how she never says no to him or tries to fight him, yet she still sees it as rape.

Reply 8

jamieTT

A lot of ''was i raped?'' threads on this and other sites have a very similar story : bf is horny and probably drunk , girl isn't sure about it but halfway through she gives in since she feels overpowered/guilty to turn him down and many times she even enjoys it. Is that rape?

Reply 9

Jessaay!

Original post by jamieTT

Legally, that means **** all.

So it's not legally rape. However, I'd agree that a woman shouldn't be coerced or feel obliged to give a man sex just because he wants it.

Your point was that he'd go to jail for it. Have you seen the conviction rate for rape? It's terrible, so no he wouldn't.

Perhaps this type of coersion should be called something else. It is still morally wrong, depending on the circumstance.

I don't agree with the picture of the 'feminist' quote you posted though, very ambiguous.

Reply 10

Le Nombre

Original post by jamieTT

Hmmm, see 'Olugboja' for what is not actually law but basically still is as it's the best we've got. What you describe is 'reluctant acquiescence', which isn't rape, as opposed to 'mere submission', which is. There were attempts to clarify this in the Sexual Offences Act but they're just even vaguer. The more recent case of Jheeta, decided on current law, suggests this would still be the case.

With regard to that sign she is not alone in making such ridiculous statements, more concerningly a judge in Cambridge fairly recently instructed the jury 'remember, no sometimes means yes'. Thanks for that pearl m'lord!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 11

redferry

Original post by jamieTT

That's not rape, just him being a knob.

Now stop trolling.

Reply 12

jamieTT

Original post by Jessaay!

Of course it would be impossible to prove in court. But let's say there was a way the court would know exactly what happened without a doubt. Now remember the wife would be appalled by such a a decision since she sees it as a minor inconvenience and her husband being a rapist is ludicrous in her mind. Should he then be convicted?

Reply 13

Jessaay!

Original post by jamieTT

I don't know what you're debating about...

I don't think, unless it caused some severe psychological damage or he was threateningly forceful, then it should necessarily be convicted but you'd have to look at this kind of thing case by case.

Reply 14

jamieTT

Original post by Le Nombre

With regard to that sign she is not alone in making such ridiculous statements, more concerningly a judge in Cambridge fairly recently instructed the jury 'remember, no sometimes means yes'. Thanks for that pearl m'lord!

Funny you should say that.

A questionnaire administered to 610 undergraduate women asked whether they had ever engaged in token resistance and, if so, asked them to rate the importance of 26 possible reasons. We found that 39.3% of the women had engaged in token resistance at least once. Their reasons fell into three categories: practical, inhibition-related, and manipulative reasons.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3379584

Reply 15

Le Nombre

Original post by jamieTT

Funny you should say that.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3379584

The facts of this case were not token resistance, she was heard yelling no by the neighbours and immediately fled the house afterwards, in just her underwear, and went to the Police station. Medical evidence showed injuries consistent with the use of physical force by the accused (I say accused, he was found guilty).

Token resistance implies they do at first then acquiesce (could even be reluctantly), there was little to suggest she acquiesced on the facts.

P.S didn't you just want the law on the facts in the OP? Which I've given you, thread seems redundant now.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 16

Fuzzpig

Understands his "needs"?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 17

interstitial

It's the same as normal rape, just to someone you are married to.

The main difference is that marital rape was not illegal until 1980-something, but IIRC it's treated pretty much the same as a 'regular' rape case now.

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 18

jamieTT

Original post by Le Nombre

I asked ''should this man be jailed?'', not is he guilty according to the law. I wanted to see how feminists will interpret it. Many feminists (about 95% if Mumsnet is any indication) also believe prostitution is rape if the woman is forced to do it for a living because she needs the money or has been abused at an early age therefore can't think straight. Consent seems to be an extremely iffy issue in feminist circles, almost like they are looking for the tiniest reason to label it as rape. Go to the feminist section on Mumsnet and read any thread on rape, prostitution, stripping, lap dancing etc and you will see what I mean.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 19

interstitial

Original post by jamieTT

I asked ''should this man be jailed?'', not is he guilty according to the law. I wanted to see how feminists will interpret it. Many feminists (about 95% if Mumsnet is any indication) also believe prostitution is rape if the woman is forced to do it for a living because she needs the money or has been abused at an early age therefore can't think right. Consent seems to be an extremely iffy issue in feminist circles, almost like they are looking for the tiniest reason to label it as rape. Go to the feminist section on Mumsnet and read any thread on rape, prostitution, stripping, lap dancing etc and you will see what I mean.