Woman claimed her husband repeatedly raped her, jury says he is not guilty - Page 7 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For discussion of moral and ethical issues.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15227272
ingliz wrote:Well, if that is the case, and he cannot control his urges, why not chemically castrate the prick. Or better still, do it the old-fashioned way, surgically.

If it really truly is "rape", then the woman obviously has emotional dependency issues if she is not leaving.

(Which again, makes it less of a rape, if the woman cannot bring herself to want to leave her "rapist")
#15227273
wat0n wrote:Are you serious? :eek:

What part of that is unbelievable?

Isn't it true that the man can only truly violate her without her consent once? And after that, the choice is really up to her?

(Legal separation with a restraining order, divorce, moving back into her parent's house)


Are you truly serious? Her husband, a man who has already had sex with her hundreds of times before, has sex with her without her consent, and then we have to immediately arrest him?

If you think the government should "do something", how about at most just some court-ordered therapy and marriage counseling.
#15227275
Rich wrote:Its not just Turkey. I think you will find such views the norm in Muslim cultures. Here's a view from Malaysia.

Egypt, under the Islamist-affiliated President Mohamed Morsi, recently ten years ago passed a law that a husband can have "goodbye sex" with his wife up to 6 hours after her death.

Egypt has since returned to being under the rule of a secular military dictatorship, but the law passed when the Muslims were given control of the government still stands.
#15227281
Puffer Fish wrote:What part of that is unbelievable?

Isn't it true that the man can only truly violate her without her consent once? And after that, the choice is really up to her?

(Legal separation with a restraining order, divorce, moving back into her parent's house)


Are you truly serious? Her husband, a man who has already had sex with her hundreds of times before, has sex with her without her consent, and then we have to immediately arrest him?

If you think the government should "do something", how about at most just some court-ordered therapy and marriage counseling.


So if a person gets mugged several times by the same guy, it's his fault?
#15227287
Puffer Fish wrote:Egypt, under the Islamist-affiliated President Mohamed Morsi, recently ten years ago passed a law that a husband can have "goodbye sex" with his wife up to 6 hours after her death.

Egypt has since returned to being under the rule of a secular military dictatorship, but the law passed when the Muslims were given control of the government still stands.


You’re shitting me right? Right? :eek:

Edit: omg I just googled it. It was certainly being drafted. That’s bad enough
#15227293
Puffer Fish wrote:And people like you will just look for release outside of a marriage.

Something that is equally as bad, if you talk to many conservative women.

(At least he won't bring home an STD to her when she later decides to have consensual sex with him)


No. You don't get to cast aspirations on people you donlt know with zero information.

I doubt you talk to women at all. Are they allowed to? or fo you keep them permanently gagged in your dungeon.
#15227294
Puffer Fish wrote:What part of that is unbelievable?

Isn't it true that the man can only truly violate her without her consent once? And after that, the choice is really up to her?

(Legal separation with a restraining order, divorce, moving back into her parent's house)


Are you truly serious? Her husband, a man who has already had sex with her hundreds of times before, has sex with her without her consent, and then we have to immediately arrest him?

If you think the government should "do something", how about at most just some court-ordered therapy and marriage counseling.


No that is evil warped logic.
#15227295
Puffer Fish wrote:It is a huge mitigating factor.

Basically, she can only possibly be "raped" once.

If she continues staying with that man, and he just "rapes" her over and over again every day, it's not really rape so much.

(Well, unless you're a radical Feminist)


Unless you have actual morals, as opposd to the hypocrisy conservatives seem to use,
#15227297
Puffer Fish wrote:Reveals what you think about marriage.

No he can't. Cheating on his wife might even be worse than having sex with her when she doesn't feel like it and says "no".


Do you know how much a 1 carat diamond ring costs and the cost for the tuxedos and dresses and the price of the wedding venue? I would estimate the total cost to be over 50 grand. That is the salary for the average worker for one year in the US I think.

Saying cheating is worse than rape is ridiculous. I think a woman should have the right to say no to sex at any time. A man who forces intercourse is as bad as a savage during war when the fighters rape innocent women as they destroy property.

If a man wants to cheat, no one can stop him. A lot of cheaters are on tinder, no doubt.

I have avoided marriage for so long because I believe in having my choice. I want to choose a man I can trust to respect my feelings and not run me over like a huge elephant. I see a lot of men who are too self-absorbed to take the time to know me and earn my trust.
#15227303
Puffer Fish wrote:It's not exactly sexual abuse in the same sense with any other form of sexual abuse.

The woman has already had (consensual) sex hundreds of times with that man, what's one more time?



So she has to keep quiet because they had sex hundreds of times before? She has to tolerate rough treatment from her husband who vowed to cherish, love, honor and take care of her? How is sexual abuse a form of cherishing? He broke his marriage vow.


And is this really "abuse"? If he just had sex with his wife when she said no and wasn't really feeling like it, is that really abuse in the sense of a woman being raped? (You know, raped by a man who's not her husband, or whom she hasn't been having sex with over a long period of time)


Rape can be committed by parents, uncles, siblings, spouses or close friends. I know someone who was molested by a male relative when she was a teenager. Rape is never consensual. Sexual abuse is unwanted sexual attention regardless of who the abuser is in relation to the abused individual.

A woman's word should be enough to get the husband to back off. If he has good comprehension of English, he should know that no means no. It is that simple.
#15227338
Puffer Fish wrote:If it really truly is "rape", then the woman obviously has emotional dependency issues if she is not leaving.

The woman obviously has economic issues.

'She' has the young children to care for and the shared finances that force many women in the US to stay with their abusers.


:roll:
#15228245
ingliz wrote:The woman obviously has economic issues.

'She' has the young children to care for and the shared finances that force many women in the US to stay with their abusers.


:roll:

Why don't we think about this for a moment.

So you just want to send the man to prison so the woman can take over his house?

How is that going to be a solution? If the man is put in prison, he will not be working, she will not have his money.

What exactly do you think the government should do in this situation? This does not sound like a case that should be punished like normal rape.
#15228250
Puffer Fish wrote:So you just want to send the man to prison so the woman can take over his house?
No. The man goes to prison because he's a law-breaking, criminal, rapist, piece of shit.

Puffer Fish wrote:How is that going to be a solution? If the man is put in prison, he will not be working, she will not have his money.
She also isn't getting raped and abused. That solves that problem, you rape apologist.

Puffer Fish wrote:What exactly do you think the government should do in this situation?
Arrest the rapist criminal. That's how laws work. There are also government programs to help women have been victimized in this way.

Puffer Fish wrote:This does not sound like a case that should be punished like normal rape.
:eh: Why? It's still rape. Rape is rape. It doesn't stop being different just because you have a fucked-in-the-head idea of what sexual abuse is, or isn't. The laws are very clear in this regard.

Are an Incel, or just a misogynist?
#15228402
Godstud wrote: She also isn't getting raped and abused. That solves that problem, you rape apologist.

It seems to me you have an obvious lack of critical thinking on this.

The alleged logic is, she is unable to leave the man because of financial considerations, isn't that correct?
That's the reason she has to let herself keep getting raped over and over again, and couldn't leave him. Isn't that correct?

But now she decides to call the police, and send her husband to prison. Isn't that going to put her in the exact same position she would be in if she had just left him in the first place??

So I guess she DID have a choice to leave him, after all, during all that time, but she DIDN'T.

Please explain to us how putting the man in prison will "protect" her.


Maybe she should have just divorced him if she didn't want to perform her wifely duties.
#15228403
ingliz wrote:I put "She" in single quotes because it could well be a he nowadays.

Yes, it could well be.

But we all know most juries are never going to convict a wife of raping her husband. Some prosecutors might even refuse to take up the case.

If a husband does not leave his wife after he rapes her, then he forfeits any right to be able to launch a criminal complaint against his wife for what she did to him.
If you stay with your spouse then you are accepting of what they did. It's too late to try to go to authorities complaining about it later.

Like I said before, it's only possible for a spouse to be raped by their spouse ONCE. They always have the option of leaving the marriage after that.

There is NO NEED for any spousal rape laws.
#15228405
Puffer Fish wrote:Please explain to us how putting the man in prison will "protect" her.
He won't rape her anymore.

Why is that so hard for a misogynist like you to understand, @Puffer Fish?

Puffer Fish wrote:If a husband does not leave his wife after he rapes her, then he forfeits any right to be able to launch a criminal complaint against his wife for what she did to him.
If you stay with your spouse then you are accepting of what they did. It's too late to try to go to authorities complaining about it later.
No. reality doesn't work that way. There are factors like coercion and other things that factor in, but you ignore because it doesn't fit into your woman-hating rapist agenda.

Puffer Fish wrote:Like I said before, it's only possible for a spouse to be raped by their spouse ONCE. They always have the option of leaving the marriage after that.
It's not that simple, moron, and ONCE is too many times for a rape.

Puffer Fish wrote:There is NO NEED for any spousal rape laws.
Yes, an asshole fool misogynist who thinks women are property WOULD think like that.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11

"Jury nullification is generally considered r[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I think that most of you don't really understand w[…]

There is a huge disagreement over those deaths.[…]

Put men in prison based only on the word of a wom[…]