Thoughts needed on this comment, please, sensitive issue.

[shipherlady]

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?

Must have been hell to be trapped in abusive relationships in the past.

It's probably hell now as well. Women are trapped in abusive relationships today because they don't have the financial security or the confidence to get free.

OP anyone who thinks that rape in any context, historical or otherwise is somehow a justifiable act is not thinking in a normal way. Rape is a violent act and any threat of violence, direct or indirect in the context of a relationship is definitely something that you should be very concerned by.

tbh think the cries of needing financial independence to get out etc are a bit OTT based on one comment

Cries of needing financial independence are never OTT.

OP, listen to me, please - do NOT ignore your gut instinct that he is building up to something. Even before I read your comment about that, I was thinking he was building up to justifying raping you in the near-future.

I have never heard any man make that sort of comment, and I have had the misfortune to deal with a lot of bloody misogynists. It is, of course, absolute bullshit. It's not true about the past (there's more anecdotal and concrete proof to show that men have, on the whole, always treasured their wives, or at least not been abusive shits to them, than the opposite, even if the context of that might be foreign to us in modern times), and it reveals a horrible attitude towards women; victim-blaming (causing rape through being financially inferior, etc.) and seeing them as commodities. And seeing as society is still set up for women to earn loads less than men, it's extra shit of him to use finances as a reason.

And how does he explain men who rape wives/partners who earn the same as them? Or more than them? Men who are unemployed or SAHDs who rape their other halves? What about men who rape other men, straight or gay, relationship or not? What about men who rape strangers, or children? He is talking out of his scary, sick, twisted, misogynist arse. The only people responsible for rape are RAPISTS.

Please, get away from this pig. Even if you are in no danger, how can you demean yourself to stay with such a scumbag who clearly hates women? There is a well-known saying, which I shall paraphrase: when people show you who they really are, pay attention. This man has just shown you who he truly is.

Listen to Oxford OP. She is almost always spot on and speaks so much sense.

Yep, men could do this legally till quite recently. That doesn't make it all right. There's a really sinister undertone to using that as an argument.

Perhaps you could ask him why he brought it up and what he meant by it, at some time when you are both in a calm frame of mind?

I haven't read everything on here; however, I think everyone's getting ahead of themselves a wee bit. Whilst I accept that it was an odd thing for someone to say, it was said in the context of a discussion about women's roles. Where he's wrong is that a man's "right" to rape his wife (which was only removed comparatively recently) was not particularly connected (as far as I'm aware) to her ability to pull her weight financially.

I remember when studying for my LL.B, the lecturer tried (somewhat dangerously) to illicit some sympathy for the first man ever to be convicted of raping his wife. The tenant of the argument was that at the point the rape took place, the man hadn't actually committed an offence (in the eyes of the law). Needless to say, many of the women on the course (otherwise intelligent) weren't able to see his point. Rape is such an emotive subject - rightly so.

OP. Your partner/husband maintains that it's not a view to which he prescribes and unless he's given you casue to the contrary, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.

I'd be fucking running for the door. Sorry OP, I've been raped in a relationship and my STBXH was sexually abusive, and you don't want to wait for his talk to tin into action. Why would anyone say that unless they thought it was ok? Even in a thirty years ago I could... Manner? To me that would sound like "thirty years ago I could, I don't see why I can't now".

Anyone can talk about what has happened before - as in , women used to be sold to men, rape was legal in a marriage, children were sent up chimneys, in some parts of the world even now women are stoned to death for adultery... but having a discussion on the past treatment of women doesn't usually involve a codicil : ' and that's what I think you / women deserve if you/ they don't pull your weight financially.'

He's connecting an act of physical violence with earning power - or lack of it. It was never an historical fact- it's in his own head.

Maybe instead of running for the door you ought to ask him - or rather tell him- that he's mistaken about this, and ask him what he thinks about a) rape and b) women not earning as much as their husbands.

I think you need to call his bluff, tell him he's mistaken and see what he says next.

Why would anyone say that unless they thought it was ok?

That makes no sense at all. None.

I'm sorry for what you've been through, but let's keep a sense of perspective. Saying something (in the context of a discussion - particularly when trying to provide an impartial assessment) doesn't necessarily mean you agree with it. It just doesn't.

Needless to say, many of the women on the course (otherwise intelligent) weren't able to see his point.

Thank God that all of the men were capable of getting the point without any of those pesky female emotions getting in the way, eh?

I too see the second thing he said as being more sinister and the preamble the means to justify it. If you had said, 'And if you took me upstairs and raped me, you would have a piece of furniture sticking out of the back of your skull!' What would be his response at that point in the 'heated' discussion? You know him well OP. If you, hand on heart, think he would say to you, 'And I would have bloody well deserved it', then great. Anything less than, would to me and as many on here have said, be a red flag the size of Buckinghamshire. My answer to your last line on your post of 13.33 is probably yes!

Great post from, AnyBagsofOxfordFuckers

OP, if your DH was made redundant you would be the higher earner in you part time job. Do you think he would think it was acceptable for you to rape him?

This has very little to do with sex (as with nearly all instances of rapes) and everything to do with power and control. He feels that you are his possession and he feels he can do what he wants with you.

Very big red flag here. Take the warning.

at your H's words in the OP.
What total nonsense.

No, that is not what happened in the past. Ever! Where did he get that idea from?

And yes, your gut feels it, because it was a threat. I'm sorry...

"Needless to say, many of the women on the course (otherwise intelligent) weren't able to see his point."

:o

Otherwise intelligent were they?

Apart from their objection to marital rape.

shipher -

"We have spoken and I am being unreasonable because he was only saying what happened before. "

But WHY was he "saying what happened before" in the context of a row?

This wasn't a theoretical discussion about gender roles throughout history. It was a heated argument.

And he personalised his comment about "what happened before" and brought it into the present tense and made it about you.

Please don't ignore your fear that he is working up to something. You know him.

Can you say a little more about what you argued about, exactly?

It sounds as if he is trying to financially abuse you with the threat of rape if you do not comply.

I've not read every comment but most of yours OP. I'm in no position to advise, seriously I'm dealing with a lot of shit from my own h that I'm currently having to put up with and try to deal with but seriously, if my h had said that to me that would be it. I'd be in serious shit street financially but I'd have to end it one way or the other. I couldn't cope with h saying something like that to me. It doesn't seem like he was condemning it and saying how vile things where back in history or how wrong things where if he was saying it nastily to you in an argument. I'd run, run like the wind away from him.

On what the OP has written so far the response is OTT, one comment based on a misunderstanding of social history, said in anger during an argument, with absolutely no prior is no reason to fear rape and LTB

(Except to the MN LTB Chorus of course, but that's a given)

Hes being an arse not wanting to climb down afterwards but thats par for the course in any relationship.

There must be more to this than the OP is letting on, to come to these more lurid conclusions.

OP my ex and I had huge blazing rows over money on a regular basis. Utterly useless though he was as a husband he never once used a nasty comment like that with a threat to my person to try and get the upper hand.

What your H said is not normal and very vicious even as heated arguments go. It's not on and if I were you I'd be giving very serious thought if I wanted to stay - would probably pack my bags tbh.

Bad enough that he seems dismissive of the whole situation women used to find themselves in, but to the use that against you in an argument is very wrong.

Well, not used to, unfortunately some women still find themselves in that situation :(

Hope you find a resolution that works for you.

I don't think anyone should try to play down what he said.

He threatened to rape you.

He wasn't talking about years ago, or history. He was angry and he wanted to put you in your place. He told you that he could take you upstairs and rape you and he's right. He could. Because he is stronger than you.

So you have to decide whether you trust him to control this urge to rape.

If you say that you feel threatened and you want to leave, then you deserve all the support you need.

Hi lazyjaney - sorry not sure if you where meaning my post was ott (apologies if this is not the case) but if so I just wanted to clarify that I said I would run like the wind. I'm not suggesting OP does or doesn't, that's her choice as is everyone's own choice. As I said I couldn't cope with my h saying that to me. Admittedly, I've been on the receiving end of physical and emotional abuse in past relationships so that may have a baring on my response. I still think the op's partner was wrong to say it though and it still gives me shivers to think of someone saying that in the first place.

I'm not a hardcore MNetter or a member of the LTB chorus .... I can't sing honestly lol :-)

'...do what I wanted to you.' The implication is that he doesn't rape because he restrains himself and it's illegal, not because the idea of non-consensual sex is repugnant.

Yes listen to oxfordbags, she speaks a lot of sense (as do others on ths thread) if my Dh said this to me I would be out the door quick. Difference is, he never would.