India not to criminalise marital rape

[thesolar65]

Then have sex with other men or women... as long as it happens with the consent of both, I dont care.

That's OK!!

 

[jaatram]

Then have sex with other men or women... as long as it happens with the consent of both, I dont care.

The same idiots who made the decision are against sex before marriage or outside it while they have nothing against raping your wife and call themselves "morally" superior



Translate that pls

Please don't

 

[Koovie]

No you can't, husband can be charged under domestic violence.

And what is the punishment for domestic violence (In this case husbands rapes wife) ?

If laws are being misused by women to harass men and take away their property( now they even want their parents property). Then what good is the f**king law ? A women can completely destroy a man's life now a says with a simple charge without even an ounce of proof. Besides such cases can be filed under domestic violence. If something is more harmful than good then its a bad idea. No matter how good it looks.

And for the millionth time: There are faults in the system which urgently need to be addressed.... but how on Earth does it help to not admit that there is something called rape within a marriage?! If someone can rape another person without having to fear rape charges, there is something seriously wrong within the system.

That is soo f**king low and its ironic coming from you considering your opinion. Get your head out of your ***, just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean you insult their parents in this way. Makes you look like a complete hypocrite in this thread.

Low? How can it even get lower than not accepting the fact that people get raped without any law protecting them ?
While some moronic MP points towards "morals" and "traditions" ?

And where is the irony? Whats the problem with my statement? Isnt it true?

If his mother is forced to have sex by her husband, would he still deny to call it rape? Its just a hypothetical question, nothing wrong with it... since its the topic of this thread, right?

And I bet my *** that many people here would not have gone so mad if this move had not been made by the BJP....

 

[Levina]

@levina Your views on this?

The issue is people view rape by stranger differently from the rape by someone the victim knows.
Historically the definition of rape is, an act of forcing s*x by a male assailant on a woman....who is NOT his wife.
This definition of rape still hasn't changed!!
Another issue is as the level of intimacy between the victim and the perpetrator increases the perception of seriousness of the assault decreases. In short, consent is presumed in a marriage; a wife is husband's property. And ergo spousal rape is acceptable.
And trust me marital rapes 're very difficult to prove because
1) Within a married couple "love-making" is somewhat regular and it would be difficult to try to make a case against your spouse.
2) Chances of misuse of consensual rape role play 're also high.

The government's reasoning behind not accepting marital rape as rape is preposterous to say the least. IMO, they don't want to accept spousal rape as rape because it is extremely difficult to prove it, the jurors would struggle to convict.

 

[SitaramVillas]

guess which modern indian state the roop kanwar case happened...

Voluntary immolation equvivalent to suicide. Not induced or forced.

Do you understand what rape means?

"Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration perpetrated against a person without that person's consent."

Do you know what marriage means? It is a sexual union agreed to by consenting adults. Where then is the question of nonconsent. If woman does not want sex, walk out of the marriage.

 

[Levina]

Do you know what marriage means? It is a sexual union agreed to by consenting adults. Where then is the question of nonconsent. If woman does not want sex, walk out of the marriage.

Is that all a marriage means to you???

 

[Desertfalcon]

Historically the definition of rape is, an act of forcing s*x by a male assailant on a woman....who is NOT his wife.
This definition of rape still hasn't changed!!

In what bizarre reading of history is THAT the definition!?! The legal and historic definition of "rape", is the sexual penetration of another, against their will; male-female, husband-wife, male-male. The key is, it is a sexual assault against an unwilling victim. Marriage has NOTHING to do with it. Any society that legally permits one to sexually assault one's wife is not protecting "tradition". It is protecting criminality and barbarism.

 

[jaatram]

for people interested in this topic.
#MaritalRape - Interesting but a Bad Idea - Revised (with tweets) · AnirbanFromRLF · Storify

 

[Koovie]

The issue is people view rape by stranger differently from the rape by someone the victim knows.
Historically the definition of rape is, an act of forcing s*x by a male assailant on a woman....who is NOT his wife.
This definition of rape still hasn't changed!!
Another issue is as the level of intimacy between the victim and the perpetrator increases the perception of seriousness of the assault decreases. In short, consent is presumed in a marriage; a wife is husband's property. And ergo spousal rape is acceptable.
And trust me marital rapes 're very difficult to prove because
1) Within a married couple "love-making" is somewhat regular and it would be difficult to try to make a case against your spouse.
2) Chances of misuse of consensual rape role play 're also high.

The government's reasoning behind not accepting marital rape as rape is preposterous to say the least. IMO, they don't want to accept spousal rape as rape because it is extremely difficult to prove it, the jurors would struggle to convict.

#A couple of points though:

1.) A significant number of victims are people who knew their assaulters

2.) The historical definition should not be used anymore... Rape happens if someone (Be it man or woman) forces his/her victim to have sex against the will of the victim. The relation should not matter at all.

3.) Yes, the problem of being able to prove rape in such a relationship does indeed exists, but that must not hinder us from accepting the fact that rapes do happen in marriages. Ignoring such an issue because of the problems you outlined is a showing the weaknesses in our legal system

4.) Same goes for misuses. There need to be changes.

5.) Agree, the GOI`s reasoning by using poverty, lack of education, "culture" etc is ridiculous.

 

[SitaramVillas]

I repeat Sati is NOT Jauhar.

Jauhar is MASS Burning of women by jumping into the fire.

Sati was burning of a single wife ALONG with her Husband. It was a RARE thing, but more common with kings all over the world.

E.g. Wife of King Chandamahasena committed Sati in 842 AD.
Queen Sampalladevi of Ghatiyala committed sati in 890 AD

Between 1200 AD and 1600 AD only 20 Sati is mentioned in the records.

Between 1500 and 1800 AD, in the Mahakosla kingdom there is records that showed Sati was done by wives of weavers, barbars and Masons.

Rarely did brahmin women commit Sati. No record show that.

In south India, most Sati was recorded by the Nayaka and Gauda castes, both warrior class.

Finally Prostitution is Legal in India. As per law, marriage is a conjugal contract between a man and women. We are discussing Law, are we not ?

I know what Jauhar is and what Sati is. As you now state it is a very rare thing and done by all castes of people, still rare and hence not a culture.

Prostitution is legal in India but wives are not prostitutes and neither is marriage legalized prostitution. Show me where in our constitution it states women who marry are prostitutes. How conjugal relations become prostitution? Any sex is automatically prostitution then? Or you think by marrying a woman a man has purchased sex?

 

[Levina]

In what bizarre reading of history is THAT the definition!?! The legal and historic definition of "rape", is the sexual penetration of another, against their will; male-female, husband-wife, male-male. The key is, it is a sexual assault against an unwilling victim. Marriage has NOTHING to do with it. Any society that legally permits one to sexually assault one's wife is not protecting "tradition". It is protecting criminality and barbarism.

You talk as if I was supporting spousal rape.
You live in America, so can you tell me how many times have the jurors been able to convict in such cases??
Spousal rape is illegal,yet jurors struggle to convict

 

[SitaramVillas]

I don't care what islam says. I am talking about LAW and Indian Constitution.

The Hindu law does not make marriage a contract between two individual. Marriage is held sacred. Most Hindu marriages are not even legally registered unlike the Muslim marriages.

 

[Desertfalcon]

You talk as if I was supporting spousal rape.
You live in America, so can you tell me how many times have the jurors been able to convict in such cases??
Spousal rape is illegal,yet jurors struggle to convict

"Struggling to convict", as such cases often hard to prove, is NOT the same thing as legal sanction for such crime. Raping one's wife in America is as much a crime as raping a stranger. You will go to prison for a long stretch, if convicted.

 

[SitaramVillas]

"Struggling to convict", as such cases often hard to prove, is NOT the same thing as legal sanction for such crime.

Not criminalizing an act is not equivalent to legal sanction of the act. When you cannot prove an act then why make it a law at all. Are laws in your country merely for show and have no substance to them?

 

[Levina]

"Struggling to convict", as such cases often hard to prove, is NOT the same thing as legal sanction for such crime.

Get this loud and clear that I'm against this decision of not criminalising marital rape.