Is Rape justified in a marriage?

[MoonWater]

As you probably know - There's HORNY, there's AFFECTIONATE, there's TENDER - there are lots of different moods that may lead to sex, or may lead away from sex. There's also lots of middle ground that's not particularly NEGATIVE about it, just not INTO it.

I guess everyone's different. I'm not at all offended when my husband makes a move on me and I'm not in the mood. He's not pushy about it, but then he really doesn't have to be, because unless I am absolutely SICK or dead tired, I don't usually tell him no - in fact, I don't think I've ever told him no unless I was sick or very tired. In other words, I don't have to be in the mood to agree to sex. Time has proven to me that he's very effective at getting me in the mood quickly, if I don't get my negativity up.

"Free your mind." Good motto in general.

I take it as a compliment that he desires me.



Well, I guess there's a difference between "not in the mood," and "absolutely no way." My husband doesn't make any moves on me when he knows I'm tired, or sick, and we certainly don't try to solve issues with sex (make up sex - gack, we both hate that). So I've literally never been in a situation where I can imagine him offending me or hurting me with his requests, hints, come ons, etc.

But I'm not easily offended, either. I'm very easy going and receptive.



To each his own. Like I said, I've never regretted it. Even if trumpets didn't flare and the sky erupt, it was still nice in the end. It's nice to be close - nice to be wanted - nice to be intimate. I don't carry baggage and resentment into sex. But I don't have someone who forces it on me either - if that were the case, I can assure you I'd be resentful - and divorced.



OK.

fair enough

Yes, I can go with that. But many people don't talk about it with each other and it becomes the elephant in the room - till one or both wander off. And sure - withholding sex is the SYMPTOM of a deeper problem - but it usually doesn't help matters. It just digs a deeper hole and contributes to the problem in my opinion.

Indeed, hence my emphasis on a couple talking it over. This is precisely why whenever my boyfriend and I find ourselves in the situation where one of us is not wanting while the other is we try to talk it over to see if there is any underlying issue or if we're just plain tired.

Relationships are complicated and differ widely. I do know this. I said what I said because so often that perspective is not even CONSIDERED, in the strident demands that our own rights be respected. In other words, in our demand to be understood and respected, sometimes we forget to try to understand and respect the other person.

My point was that maybe we should remind ourselves that the other person has feelings and needs as well - and maybe, just MAYBE, we should consider putting their needs and feelings ahead of our own sometimes.



This rarely happens, because we are very compatible in that area. It has happened a time or two, and I didn't push him. But, see, here's the deal - I'm not responsible for his actions, I'm only responsible for my own. It was his choice not to have sex. It was my choice TO have sex. He has never forced me and I have never forced him.

I guess I'm just not too hung up on keeping score. We have a very fair relationship. We cut each other slack in different ways, because different things are important to each of us, and we each have different weaknesses, needs, and peculiarities.

I wasn't expecting you to be the type to keep score and that was pretty much what I thought the situation would be like.

It can work both ways, it's just a matter of what works best for the couple.

 

[Autodidact]

Other side of the coin, husbands. Best way to continue to get lots and lots of sex in your marriage is to make sure that when you do have it, your wife has an excellent time, and looks forward to her next chance to have just as much fun. Basically, if mama happy, everybody happy.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

This islamonline.com article makes it pretty clear that rape is not allowed in marriage, according to Islam. But I still feel the religious baggage needlessly confuses what ought to be a straightforward issue:

As for the husband’s right to sexual access and its conditions, Sheikh Ibn al-`Uthaymin, the well-known Saudi scholar, adds:

“It is obligatory upon the wife to respond to her husband if he calls her to his bed. However, if she is psychologically ill and is not able to actively respond to his call or if she has a physical illness, then in such cases it is not allowed for the husband to call upon her. This is because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "There is to be no harm done or reciprocation of harm." He should either refrain or enjoy her company in such a way that does not harm her.”

So, this indicates that there shouldn’t be anything called marital rape in the Islamic marriage, i.e. marriage governed by the rules and teachings of Allah Almighty and the beautiful example set by the noble Prophet, Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him.
...

“Intimacy should be a matter of etiquette and courtesy, not a matter of abstract desire. The Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, as `Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her narrates, used to have good foreplay and fondling and the like so that a spouse should be in the mood to have intimacy. What the Hadith means is that a wife should respond positively. Man should never jump to the extent of forcing his wife, but she should show no arrogance or hatred or denial when it comes to her appreciation and respect of her husband. Her denial to intimacy usually should give a hint to the husband that she is not physically or emotionally ready for that.

The husband should be of good reason and understand her situation. The husband should show almost the same response, and the same etiquette, if the wife hints to desiring intimacy with him. However, he is less offensive than his wife if he doesn't show a good response. In general, the Qur’an says, "They (wives) have as many rights as they are committed to duties." But a man should not be away from intimacy for any longer than four months, if the woman is in need of it.”
​

​

[emphasis in original]

I.M.H.O..... saying "there shouldn't be anything called rape" is sort of like saying "there shouldn't be anything called theft" because your wife should give you her money if you ask for it. To me, this kind of language comes precariously close to blaming the victim.
​

Furthermore: A wife is obliged to have sex unless she is psychologically or physically ill? She must "respond positively" and should not show "denial or arrogance"? What if she is simply not in the mood, what if she's just sleepy or she would rather be doing something else at the moment? I don't think it's healthy in most relationships for a woman to be at her husband's beck and call, and I certainly don't think it's healthy to heap shame and guilt and "obligation" on a person, when they sometimes cannot help how they feel at the moment.

I realize some people will argue this article isn't saying a woman should feel guilty, etc. but I'm saying this is the implication, the way the article is worded. And it's worded in this inelegant way i.m.o. because instead of following real-life experience and common sense, they are trying to shoe-horn Islamic traditions and Qu'ranic verses into the conclusions of experience and reason, and when they try to fit all the pieces together, it's awkward. The burden of being constrained by ancient customs and teachings unnecessarily confuses an issue that should be relatively straightforward: spouses should be considerate of their partner's needs; this includes the need to have sex, and sometimes the need to have some space.

And why would a husband be "less offensive than his wife if he doesn't show a good response"? I just don't see very much wisdom in statements like this. I think I would find far better advice on almost any link that comes up in a Google search for "marriage sex advice" or "marital rape" and such links would not even claim to be the end-all-be-all advice handed down from God.

 

[FAVFAV]

I vote that it is wrong. The mere fact the husband owns her, does not give
him the right to assault her. (Neither does the wife get to assault her owner.)

I would agree with this, but I hesitate to call it rape. Rape, to me, signifies an attack upon an unsuspecting victim. It causes great trauma and deserves especially severe punishment.

I'm thinking that a husband could be considered guilty of coercion if he demands sex on the threat of non physical punishment. If he demands sex and forces himself on a woman with physical violence, then he is guilty of assault.

I think rape should be reserved for the low life scum who prowl streets looking for a victim.

 

[Kathryn]

I would agree with this, but I hesitate to call it rape. Rape, to me, signifies an attack upon an unsuspecting victim. It causes great trauma and deserves especially severe punishment.

I'm thinking that a husband could be considered guilty of coercion if he demands sex on the threat of non physical punishment. If he demands sex and forces himself on a woman with physical violence, then he is guilty of assault.

I think rape should be reserved for the low life scum who prowl streets looking for a victim.

I think I understand your sentiment on this, but I have to disagree.

If anyone uses physical force and/or violence to have sex, I consider that rape. Also, in my opinion, forcing someone to have sex by threatening them with harm - either physical or otherwise (ie, "I'm going to divorce you and take the kids," or "I'll leave and then what will you do?" or "You're so pathetic, no one else would want you - you better do what I say or you'll find yourself out on the street") is worse than coercion. I would call that rape as well.

Why ANYONE would want to force sex on an unwilling partner/mate is totally beyond me. I would say definitely in those cases, sex is not so much physical desire as it is the desire to control and dominate.

I'd call it rape and I'd leave.

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

Ok well before anyone says it isn't, I was arguing with some people who in their religious belief believe that there is no such thing as rape in a marriage. In other words, if a woman decides to marry she must give up some of her "rights" and please her man. One woman told me that a man has needs and the purpose of a woman is to please those needs.

I know this sounds crazy but I was asked why it's rape and why it isn't justified in my point of view. Well for one, I don't think it's fair to the woman. I was raised in a society where men and women are equal in a relationship. However I'm not married, I was wondering what anyone else's point of view is when sex is forced upon a woman who is married to her husband.

I think it very rare for someone to think these days that they must surrender their human rights in marriage to some man.
If they do and they are western then they need counselling or possibly psychiatric evaluation.
If they are from some backward little 'stan village somewhere then it would not be so surprising...but still horrendous to our western sensibilities.

 

[MoonWater]

I would agree with this, but I hesitate to call it rape. Rape, to me, signifies an attack upon an unsuspecting victim. It causes great trauma and deserves especially severe punishment.

I'm thinking that a husband could be considered guilty of coercion if he demands sex on the threat of non physical punishment. If he demands sex and forces himself on a woman with physical violence, then he is guilty of assault.

I think rape should be reserved for the low life scum who prowl streets looking for a victim.

actually most rapes that occur are not done by lowlifes prowling the street looking for some random victim. Those are actually the rarest kind. Most often rape is comitted on a person by someone they know and is done in a place they are familiar with, like their own home or the home of the person who attacked them. Indeed date rape is one of the most common forms of rape.

Why should a marriage licsense change whether or not the perpetrator is charged with rape or assualt? Marriage is not a free pass of garunteed sex whenever you want it.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Other side of the coin, husbands. Best way to continue to get lots and lots of sex in your marriage is to make sure that when you do have it, your wife has an excellent time, and looks forward to her next chance to have just as much fun. Basically, if mama happy, everybody happy.

So, afterwards, let her make a sandwich for herself while she makes mine?

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

So, afterwards, let her make a sandwich for herself while she makes mine?

My boyfriend can make his own damn sandwiches, but if he had just raped me then I would definately make them for him...with ground glass and rat poison.

 

[Autodidact]

So, afterwards, let her make a sandwich for herself while she makes mine?

Well, Kilgore, which approach to sandwich-making do you think is more likely to lead to you getting laid on a regular basis?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Well, Kilgore, which approach to sandwich-making do you think is more likely to lead to you getting laid on a regular basis?

Or, is the real question, which approach to sex is more likely to lead to me getting a sandwich on a regular basis?

 

[Autodidact]

OK you made me smile.

 

[angrymoose]

Two months ago, I had surgery on my achilles tendon, and even though that was my ANKLE - and not a part of my body that is an integral part of our sex life - he knew that I was in pain, and that the cast was uncomfortable, and that I was generally out of sorts for several weeks. He was patient, loving, and waited for me to come around. He let me know "I'm ready when you are" but would never have expected me to do anything I wasn't ready to do.

And I was touched when a couple of weeks into this ordeal, he let me know that he would just absolutely love some, errr, attention - whenever I felt like it. Did I feel sexy and hot with my gigantic cast on my leg? No. But I appreciated that he was thoughtful and yet still tenderly passionate toward me. That went a long way toward restoring intimacy in ouintr relationship!

I think this is a good example of putting the physical needs of our partner above the physical needs of ourselves. A bit of sacrifice sometimes, grounded in love and respect for the other.

Nicely said.

For me, i'd say it a bit simply. He loves you and so, he was more concerned for your well being than about his "needs" but he's human. You love him back, you have interests in his needs to.

Your marriage sounds strong.

Rare to meet somebody who can appreciate Truman. My grandfather considered him the best president the US ever had.

 

[Kathryn]

Nicely said.

For me, i'd say it a bit simply. He loves you and so, he was more concerned for your well being than about his "needs" but he's human. You love him back, you have interests in his needs to.

Your marriage sounds strong.

Rare to meet somebody who can appreciate Truman. My grandfather considered him the best president the US ever had.

Thank you, angrymoose!

I am married to a really good man. Honestly, I think he's the exception rather than the rule. That's not a slam on men, it's a slam on human nature in general, I guess.

As for Truman, I am not up on all his policies, but he seems like he was a blunt, bold, and courageous person, and I like those qualities, especially in a leader.

 

[angrymoose]

Thank you, angrymoose!

I am married to a really good man. Honestly, I think he's the exception rather than the rule. That's not a slam on men, it's a slam on human nature in general, I guess.

Well, I don't know about the rule.

Lots of people are somewhat selfish and a person may not perceive the pain of another but I think, a normal person, on perceiving your pain, would care about it.

 

[Kathryn]

Well, I don't know about the rule.

Lots of people are somewhat selfish and a person may not perceive the pain of another but I think, a normal person, on perceiving your pain, would care about it.

You're probably right. My first husband was very abusive, and his needs and psychoses always came first, so my viewpoint is surely skewered.

Regardless, I feel like I'm in paradise married to a "normal" man now!

 

[DallasApple]

jeese, you're making it sound like a man will go crazy or couldn't possibly be happy in a marriage unless sex is involved. Someone like you should definitely know that there is more to marriage than sex and that it is more than possible to be happy in one without it. And then the line about "no right to act aggrieved if partner becomes aggressive or strays" makes it sound like you're blaming the victim. What I'm getting from that is that you're saying if I go for a couple weeks or a month of not being in the mood and my boyfriend decides to find release in some other woman who is, then I shouldn't be upset with him over it? What kind of sense does that make?

in my mind it would actually be more offensive to insist, push, or coerce someone into having sex if they're not in the mood. And yes that goes both ways for me. There have been times when my boyfriend hasn't been in the mood and the instant he tells me I back off out of respect for him just as he does the same for me. Now don't get me wrong I'm not calling "allowing yourself to be coerced" rape and nor do I condemn such a thing IF you TRULY find yourself content and happy with that. I just don't feel you can judge other couples by that same standard and look down on someone or mentally scold them simply because they aren't willing to put out when they're not in the mood and you are.

Get used to it..If YOU dont satisfy him??Because he wants to "make love" to you then he will FIND someone else..Thats what "making love is"!! Got it???

Oh and remember you should be FLATTERED everytime he gets a woody and he's aiming at you because you are THERE..and if you arent there its YOUR fault..since you didnt "take care of his woody" that he went and "made love" to someone else.

Love

Dallas

 

[DallasApple]

I think I understand your sentiment on this, but I have to disagree.

If anyone uses physical force and/or violence to have sex, I consider that rape. Also, in my opinion, forcing someone to have sex by threatening them with harm - either physical or otherwise (ie, "I'm going to divorce you and take the kids," or "I'll leave and then what will you do?" or "You're so pathetic, no one else would want you - you better do what I say or you'll find yourself out on the street") is worse than coercion. I would call that rape as well.

Why ANYONE would want to force sex on an unwilling partner/mate is totally beyond me. I would say definitely in those cases, sex is not so much physical desire as it is the desire to control and dominate.

I'd call it rape and I'd leave.

Why anyone would want to do it?..Is beyond you?Go to a Christian forum and listen to the men.They want to "do it" because unless they are holding a litteral knife to her throat its "consentual"..They ask questions such as "why should he EVEN have to ask her" and then quote scripture on her body being his and his hers Yada yada..

Its a SEX crazed MANIA out there..She has to be VERY (extrememely tired)..or SICK as a dog or "fasting and praying" which MAX is a few days..

They say it Kathryn.."why do we only get to have sex when she WANTS to"????I would like to to be a "mutual descion"..I.E HER havign sex when she DOESNT want to!!!!How in the hell is THAT mutual????

Then they start WHINING (Christians) about how they dont want "duty sex" when that is the ONLY reason she kicked it up a notch in the FIRST place out of DUTY..Then they say ..."what about some spice here"..Cant ya muster up a "little passion"..?????

Passion for WHAT???Having sex when you dont WANT to???

They will flat out when I back them in a corner say she should FAKE IT!!!!!So as NOT to hurt his FEELINGS!!!

NEVER mind!!!

 

[DallasApple]

Here is the great one..

A woman "sacrificing" having sex when she DOESNT want to is NOTHING (compared to ) ABRAHAM being willing to AX murder his ONLY son for God..JESUS himself being tortured and mocked and dying a slow agonizing death for us..And DAVID fighting Goliath..

So whats the big deal?

Just do it like "maintenence" and cleaning a TOILET BOWL..(Im not kiding)..

Its not as BAD as dying on the cross or murdering your own child..JUST do "it".

SICK!

 

[Kathryn]

Why anyone would want to do it?..Is beyond you?Go to a Christian forum and listen to the men.They want to "do it" because unless they are holding a litteral knife to her throat its "consentual"..They ask questions such as "why should he EVEN have to ask her" and then quote scripture on her body being his and his hers Yada yada..

Its a SEX crazed MANIA out there..She has to be VERY (extrememely tired)..or SICK as a dog or "fasting and praying" which MAX is a few days..

They say it Kathryn.."why do we only get to have sex when she WANTS to"????I would like to to be a "mutual descion"..I.E HER havign sex when she DOESNT want to!!!!How in the hell is THAT mutual????

Then they start WHINING (Christians) about how they dont want "duty sex" when that is the ONLY reason she kicked it up a notch in the FIRST place out of DUTY..Then they say ..."what about some spice here"..Cant ya muster up a "little passion"..?????

Passion for WHAT???Having sex when you dont WANT to???

They will flat out when I back them in a corner say she should FAKE IT!!!!!So as NOT to hurt his FEELINGS!!!

NEVER mind!!!

Wow, Dallas. I'm not trying to be insulting - I'm being serious. Do you think you need to go talk with a professional about some of this?

I AM married to a Christian man - and our relationship is NOTHING like what you're describing. You're getting your baggage all over my happiness. Please move it.

I'm not doubting that there are unhappy relationships like the one you're describing. But that's not what I was describing. I feel like you keep trying to make what I am describing into what you're so bitter about - and they are NOT the same thing.

I DO appreciate the fact that my handsome, considerate, passionate husband desires me. I'm honored to be his wife, and he's damn lucky to have me as his wife as well - and he knows it. What we enjoy is MUTUAL - not one sided like the scenario you're describing.

What I'm talking about only works when there is MUTUAL RESPECT. Sorry, but I thought that was pretty obvious.