When is marital rape not rape?

[Stampstamp]

When the man doesn't think it is, apparently according to this article

In my understanding, compelling a woman to have sex because she's your wife/girlfriend and therefore she should agree, is rape - and I believe this is now supported in UK law. The article seems to be saying that if there is no level of force, it's not rape. The writer asks "But is it clear from the question that we're talking about making someone have sex, or someone not consenting?". What exactly is the distinction?? Yet another journalist who thinks women's bodies belong to men.

Urgh horrible article with no real 'conclusion'

That article and the figures at the bottom are chilling. I abhor the idea of women submitting to men under these circumstances yet deeply ingrained societal norms make it less than straight forward.
There are some parts of the world where it is truly horrific to be a woman.

It's an article primarily about the study's methodology. It also may not be the case in each of the countries surveyed that the act described would be rape.

Maybe in the country it wouldn't be described as rape, but it clearly is rape - that's just laws not catching up with women being people.

The article almost has a tone of it being unfair to trick someone into admitting they've raped their partner by using different words (ie. omitting the word 'force')

I don't like this apparently fine line between compelling consent, and making someone have sex either - surely they're one and the same practically speaking, and suggesting they aren't is rules jockeying.

Why do so many people seek to minimise what the rapist does, even if they themselves say they wouldn't do it, and what they did was awful?

Most of her assertions that these figures aren't supported by evidence come down to whether the area is "post conflict" as if war is some kind of excuse to be violent against women .

Having sex with someone when you know they don't want it is rape. And men do know when they rape women. It is uncomfortable to think of it like that, being a woman. But when men tell you what they are like. Believe them.

The war zone thing is relevant though. Rapes happen a lot more when social boundaries are broken down. We would expect rape to be much higher in recent war zone areas.

I don't get the social psychologist's point about "Is this a case of coerced sexual intercourse or oppressive gender norms?" Her answer: "I would argue the latter." Is she really saying that sex against a partner's will is not coerced sex?

Yes but that doesn't make it OK and it doesn't mean those figures should be adjusted/ignored to take account of that.

Sorry that was about the war zone bit.

I think she is arguing that about coerced sex.

The reporter couldn't understand the high rape figures. The message from other media sources is a quarter of Asian men rape. Are Asian men more likely to rape? I would not be happy to read that if I was an Asian man. So, as I see it, the reporter wanted to delve a bit more into the story, so he says it isn't a representative survey of Asian men - true: it is limited within countries and has unrepresentative number of war torn countries. SO, as far as that goes, I agree.

But they have raped women. They have admitted it Just because it happened in a war torn country does not mean they are not a rapist and a woman hasn't been raped.

Do you want a global value of what proportion of Asian men rape? If so, then you need a representative survey. The study could have just surveyed Asian men in prison - the results would have been skewed even more.

I think it is significant that men become rapists more often in war torn zones. I think that should be highlighted, not minimised.

Scallops, I agree it should be highlighted which probably means a specific study rather than including it in a general study.

Scallops
Quite.

That more men choose to adopt sexual violence when the normal rules of society (ie in a conflict situation) is highly worrying and should warrant more scrutiny, not dismissal.

Hmm.

I wonder if they'd done a survey like this in 1948, whether they would have found equally staggering numbers of European males were rapists.

The number of women and girls (sometimes as young as 8) who were victims of the allied troops raping their way across Europe. was fucking incredible and it's part of a hidden, shameful history that is very rarely discussed.

Men using war to unleash all their hatred of females, is pretty universal.

The Red Army's role in that was grim. My father's friend (German-born) hid with her mother & sister in a potato field for 2 days & nights to avoid them. Ilsa (12) escaped, but her sister (15) and mother were raped by Russians. Lots of women killed themselves and their children feeling they had no other way out. The British did similar in Egypt.
Horrendous.

I'm sure they would find the same in any post-conflict area, whatever part of the world its in. I can see the point that the article is making that you can't extrapolate to say that 1/4 of Asian men are rapists - like most research, that particular piece has been badly reported in the media. But then the article strays off that point to say that some of the rape isn't actually rape, because no force was used.

Stampstamp

Quite.

JuliaScurr - did you see this story the other day? The actions of the Red Army were horrific.

Just about to read this, it is a response to the article

everydayvictimblaming.com/submissions/the-bbc-rape-myths-and-damaging-advice/

Myth #3: Domestic violence is committed almost entirely by men, and lesbian relationships are gentler and provide women a refuge from male patriarchal dominance and violence.

Actually, the evidence is virtually undisputed that domestic violence is at least as common in lesbian relationships as it is in heterosexual ones. For example, a 1997 survey of 1,099 lesbians found that 52 percent of the respondents had been abused by a female lover or partner and that 30 percent admitted having abused a female lover or partner. Of those who had been victims of abuse, more than half (51.5 percent) reported that they also had been abusive toward their partners ("Lie and Gentle warrior: Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships," Journal of Social Science Research, Vol. 15).

In another survey of lesbians who had had previous relationships with men, 45 percent reported that they had experienced physical aggression from their most recent female partner alone, while only 32 percent had ever experienced any aggression from any male partner. According to St. Joseph's University sociology professor Claire Renzetti, lesbian batterers "display a terrifying ingenuity in their selection of abuse tactics, frequently tailoring the abuse to the specific vulnerabilities of their partners" ("Violent Betrayal: Partner Abuse in Lesbian Relationships").

To their credit, even the X Project – whose Web site and public materials contain scores of questionable statements about men and domestic violence – cites Renzetti's research findings that "Violence in gay/lesbian relationships occurs at about the same frequency as violence in heterosexual relationships." Over the past 30 years feminists have often played an admirable role in pushing for societal acceptance for gays and lesbians. However, feminists have shamefully turned their backs on battered lesbians, and have stifled the attempts of activists to address lesbian domestic violence.

The above point is in response to the many assertions in this thread that it is only men who are ever violent or the cause of violence.

There are clearly no men in lesbian relationships. Explain that one.

What assertions?

Was that meant for the 'evil men' thread

Yea sorry in my zeal I posted this to the wrong thread {blush}