Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Thoughts needed on this comment, please, sensitive issue.

246 replies

shipherlady · 03/12/2013 09:50

Please do not read on if you're sensitive to comments regarding rape, I do not wish to upset anybody, just need impartial advice.

Anyway, dh and I having discussion about women's roles, basically, he held the view that if a 'woman does not pull her weight' financially, men have the right to rape them and do what they want in the bedroom. We were having a massive argument at the time, and he is at pains to say that this is what happened in the past ( I question this) and he has no desire to do this at all, but that is 'how it was' in the past when men earned all the money.
OK, now logically, I should be OK with his 'impartial' assessment of the past -even though I disagree with it-however, it's made me feel uncomfortable.
What do you think?

OP posts:
Damnautocorrect · 03/12/2013 09:54

Jesus so a woman has to pay to keep her choices or basically prostitute herself?!? WHAT
I have no advice, someone better will be along soon. But I just wanted to say I'm not surprised you feel awkward about it. If he said it with distaste that's one thing but to agree? No no no

treaclesoda · 03/12/2013 09:55

Honestly? I think that is such a weird, sinister thing to say. And in no way do I believe it was 'the norm' in the past. Its not as if all those elderly men you see walking around today thought it was fine in the 1950s to rape their wives because she stayed at home and did childcare. Some maybe did, but that's because there are abusive men in every generation, not because it used to be 'the norm'.

Corygal · 03/12/2013 09:56

Yeuch. It certainly wasn't how it was in the past, as it happens, atho people love to use a fantasy history to justify abuse today.

He sounds repellent.

tinselkitty · 03/12/2013 09:56

I don't think I understand. Is it his opinion that this used to be the case a long time ago and therefore talking about history or does is it his opinion that rape is ok if women don't pull their weigh financially?

If it's the first then I wouldn't see much of a problem as he is expressing an opinion about other peoples opinions in the past, he's not saying he agrees it thinks it was a correct opinion.

However, if it's the second and he is expressing this as an opinion he holds I'd be running for the hills!

Either way it's a disgusting view, although he may be correct in saying historically it's a view that's been held by some men.

Original poster
shipherlady · 03/12/2013 09:57

He's never been sexually abusive. And I honestly don't think he believes it himself, but yes it is uncomfortable to hear him say this.

OP posts:
Original poster
shipherlady · 03/12/2013 09:57

There was venom when he said it.

OP posts:
tinselkitty · 03/12/2013 09:57

And by historically I would be thinking way back in medieval times, not recent history.

Vivacia · 03/12/2013 09:58

In the past it was legally impossible for a husband to rape his wife because she was seen as his property and marriage meant he had the right to sex whenever he wanted.

That your husband interprets this fact as do with finances would worry me. At best he's misunderstood and your disagreement has not prompted him to go and check his facts.

Secondly, the fact that the topic of rape came up during a disagreement is even more worrying.

Yamyoid · 03/12/2013 09:58

Agree with treacle.
That's a scary thing he's said. Did you talk about what would happen if you found yourself in a position where you're financially dependent on him?

SJisontheway · 03/12/2013 10:00

I think you have contradicted yourself. Initially you say that he held the view himself. If this is the case it is repulsive and unforgivable.
Then you say that he says this is how it was. I guess its not inaccurate to say that many men held these views in the past, and still do, particularly in other cultures. They see women very much as possessions. So long as he is appalled by these views, I could move on. Is he?

Vivacia · 03/12/2013 10:01

And by historically I would be thinking way back in medieval times, not recent history In England, marital rape wasn't criminalised until 1991.

myroomisatip · 03/12/2013 10:01

I think it is a shocking statement and I agree with Vivacia that I cannot conceive of an argument where that would be raised unless it was to do with a (perceived) lack of sex or money.

JustSpeakSense · 03/12/2013 10:05

I'm confused....did your DH say:

a) this was a view HE held & agreed with
b) a view he did not agree with
c) or one that HE would have happily agreed with (if it were a long time ago and not modern day)?

Hullygully · 03/12/2013 10:05

It is an extremely odd thing to say. I can't think of a single understandable reason.

yeahyeah75 · 03/12/2013 10:06

It's a bit of a strange statement to make, is he saying he agrees with it?

It would make me feel uncomfortable too tbh Sad

Meerka · 03/12/2013 10:07

I'm afraid a comment like that would permanently affect the relationship with my husband and a great deal for the worse.

There's so much wrong, deeply wrong with that comment that I don't know where to begin. You man a woman with children who is stay at home can also be freely raped by the father of the children? Perhaps he thinks that men who don't pull their financial weight should also be freely raped?

right now I've stopped bristling (difficult to do when you're holding a preg sickbucket btw, sickness and outrage don't go together!) ... questoin.

Does he mean that men still have the right, or that men had the right? a lot lies in how you write it. Given that women were not allowed to earn their own money, Im rather afraid that he means still. Because if he means that men hadthe right, sadly that was very true - but they had the legal right whether the woman had money or not.

MrsCakesPremonition · 03/12/2013 10:09

Marital rape has never been quid pro quo for women failing to pull their weight financially. It has always been about men possessing women and feeling entitled to control and abuse them, and about women not having the legal right, the financial independence or social support to escape. Historically speaking, women weren't allowed money of their own and so no woman could "pull her weight financially" - her husband already owned everything.

MistAllChuckingFrighty · 03/12/2013 10:10

It was not illegal for a man to rape a woman he happened to be married to until 1991. Is this what he means ? It had nothing to do with who earned the money though, since women have actually formed a major part of the workforce since time began.

Does he often make these kinds of pronouncements overlaid with a sinister degree of misogyny, or could you put it down to simple ignorance ? I think the distinction could be quite important, for you.

wannaBe · 03/12/2013 10:12

I think we need context though.

how did this comment come about? because you don't just happen to say it do you? What were you talking about, etc.

MistAllChuckingFrighty · 03/12/2013 10:13

Apparently they were having an argument at the time he made this comment. Which makes it more worrying, because if this was said to me I would consider it a threat.

OP, are you a SAHM ?

Vivacia · 03/12/2013 10:14

It was nothing to do with money. It was due to the fact that the marriage vows were seen to be the woman legally giving consent to her husband forever. Therefore the man couldn't illegally have sex with his wife, by legal definition it was always legal. The woman couldn't revoke her consent.

Vivacia · 03/12/2013 10:14

Apparently they were having an argument at the time he made this comment. Which makes it more worrying, because if this was said to me I would consider it a threat.

That was my thought too Mist

JoinYourPlayfellows · 03/12/2013 10:14

Did he say it as a threat?

Original poster
shipherlady · 03/12/2013 10:23

We were arguing about money at the time. Now to be impartial about it, he has never been sexually abusive to me or demanded sex, and, yes, he was at pains to point out that this is how it was in the past, however, he said it really nastily to me, as in: 'I could take you upstairs and do what I want to you'. It was his tone. If he was matter of fact about it during a non-argument, I'd probably agree that to an extent things were like this. But like another poster said, whether or not women were paupers or rich, husbands could do this anyway until 1991.

This is the honest truth of the matter.

OP posts:
Meerka · 03/12/2013 10:26

I'd be inclined to make sure I was financially independent of your husband forever. And like I say, there'd been a degree of ice in the air for a very long time indeed.