[XogGyux]

You're just creating a red herring. I am not condoning marital rape or saying that is some great thing that husbands should do.

I'm just saying this sort of thing is probably not an area for government to get involved in, in most cases.

Aside from the issue of consent, what is being done to her in that situation is perfectly normal and natural. The only difference is this time she didn't want it.

Fuck it is.
There is nothing "normal" about a man raping a woman, even if that woman is his wife.
Normalizing this is disgusting.
And sure it is the government's role to protect people (both women and men) being abused by their spouses (or anyone else for that matter).

[Puffer Fish]

Sex without consent is rape.

Not when it's between husband and wife. Then it's not that simple.

Unless it's one of these new age marriages that aren't really intended to mean anything, where it's seen as perfectly fine for the man or woman to have an affair on the side.

In your view, the man and woman haven't really consented to anything when they entered a marriage, and the marriage imposes no obligations or restrictions on either of them.
So I think that's the difference here.

[Puffer Fish]

There is nothing "normal" about a man raping a woman, even if that woman is his wife.
Normalizing this is disgusting.

I meant normal sex, the physical act is entirely normal, and they have shared in it before.

[Godstud]

The entire country of Turkey would disagree with you.

The Turks can lick my balls. No one gives a crap about those rapist barbarians.

Not when it's between husband and wife. Then it's not that simple.

it is simple, but you're not smart enough to understand why, despite us explaining it to you numerous times.

Unless it's one of these new age marriages that aren't really intended to mean anything, where it's seen as perfectly fine for the man or woman to have an affair on the side.

If you need an affair on the side, you shouldn't be married.

Marriage is not consent.

NORMAL SEX is between two consenting adults.

[XogGyux]

Yes, it is.

Any sex where consent is not given, is NOT ordinary sex. Ordinary sex is between two CONSENTING adults.

So what? Agreeing to marry someone is not giving consent to sex on demand. What part of that can't you understand?

Every time you have sex there has to be consent. Period. It's that simple. Normally, between married people, this is easily given. Sometimes, he or she, says, "Not today.". That does not mean you can still do it, because he/she was OK with it the day before...

Ah, so now we see the REAL argument. You're playing a VICTIM, aren't you?

In most cases, the rapist gets away with it. Relationships aren't simple.

Men are often not logical, either. Why would you hurt the woman you loved, by sexually assaulting her? Think on that one, a bit.

It's not a red herring. That's a bullshit assumption. Stop trying to excuse rape.

It is not something that ANY husband should do, as it's a crime.

Sexual assault is NOT normal and NOT natural among human beings. If the person does not want it, and you force them to have sex, then that is sexual assault.

Consent is needed for any sex(regardless of how many times you've given it in the past). That's the reality.

Turkey is full of rapist cunts, so I don't care about them.

Absolutely. Some people seem to be under the understanding that a married woman is some sort of property for the man to do as he pleases. Obviously this should never be the case.

Not when it's between husband and wife. Then it's not that simple.

Unless it's one of these new age marriages that aren't really intended to mean anything, where it's seen as perfectly fine for the man or woman to have an affair on the side.

Ofcourse it is THAT simple. How many other things do you force your wife to do? Apparently sex... you also force her to do the dishes? Clean the floors? You choose what she wears? What you are describing is a slave, not a wife.

[XogGyux]

I meant normal sex, the physical act is entirely normal, and they have shared in it before.

As others have told you. "normal sex" is consentual. If a woman says no, and you still stick your wiener inside her, you are raping her.

[Puffer Fish]

NORMAL SEX is between two consenting adults.

She gave some level of consent when she agreed in front of crowd full of witnesses to be married.

It's true that's not exactly consent to sex anytime the husband feels like it, and that she still may not be consenting to a specific instance of sex, but she has given consent to sex in general, with that man.

I'm not saying it's okay, but some level of consent has been given and does exist there, so it's not really the same thing as normal rape.

[XogGyux]

She gave some level of consent when she agreed in front of crowd full of witnesses to be married.

And that is not a consent for "you can fuck me whenever you feel like it".
"Do you agree to love your spouse in sickness and in health, poor or wealth, etc" do you ever see a priest/rabbi/shamman/etc say "do you agree to let your man inside you everytime he has a boner"?
Fuck off.

[Godstud]

False.

Unless there was an, "I promise to give you sex whenever you want it.", clause in the marriage vows, and it was signed and stamped by a solicitor, then it is NOT consent.

@Puffer Fish You are making up bullshit to push your marital rape agenda. Why is that? Do you hate women so much?


Sex without consent is rape. - Read it and memorize it. It really is that simple.

[Puffer Fish]

He's not really physically doing anything to her that he's not done before.

Again, not saying this is okay, but at the same time it's also not that terrible. This isn't exactly like an ordinary rape.

[Puffer Fish]

Unless there was an, "I promise to give you sex whenever you want it.", clause in the marriage vows, and it was signed and stamped by a solicitor, then it is NOT consent.

Older forms of marriage vows included a "wifely duties" clause in the ceremony.

[XogGyux]

He's not really physically doing anything to her that he's not done before.

Again, not saying this is okay, but at the same time it's also not that terrible. This isn't exactly like an ordinary rape.

Yes, he is. He is now forcefully violating this woman's body autonomy.
If you cannot see the difference between sex and rape, that's a YOU problem.

[XogGyux]

Older forms of marriage vows included a "wifely duties" clause in the ceremony.

And that is why they are "older forms" because over time we have realized that those humans that came before us were barbarians. Clearly some of us are still barbarians.

[Puffer Fish]

Yes, he is. He is now forcefully violating this woman's body autonomy.

But not as bad as a woman who is raped under other conditions, with a man she never agreed to have sex with.

[Godstud]

He's not really physically doing anything to her that he's not done before.

So what? If we have a boxing match, but then the next day at dinner I beat you up, would that be OK with you?

No. It would be assault.

Again, not saying this is okay, but at the same time it's also not that terrible. This isn't exactly like an ordinary rape.

That's false. You are trying to defend it and say it IS OK. You are lying by saying otherwise.

It is terrible.

But not as bad as a woman who is raped under other conditions, with a man she never agreed to have sex with.

If anything, it's WORSE than rape from a stranger because it's the person you TRUST and love, doing it.

Older forms of marriage vows included a "wifely duties" clause in the ceremony.

So what if they raped their wives 100 years ago. It's not acceptable now.

Please post a legal document showing what "wifely duties" are.

[Puffer Fish]

So what? If we have a boxing match, but then the next day at dinner I beat you up, would that be OK with you?

No. It would be assault.

That would obviously be a huge mitigating factor, if I had previously agreed to (and carried out) a fighting match with you before, not that long ago.

Even that would be a little bit different, because this is an act that involves inflicting physical injuries.

Just like if a husband hurts his wife during sex, that does change the circumstances.

[XogGyux]

But not as bad as a woman who is raped under other conditions, with a man she never agreed to have sex with.

Dude, so if you agree to have sex with another dude because you were particularly experimental that night, and 2 days later this dude shows up in your house and forcefully undresses you and repeatedly thrust his penis in your ass until he is satisfied despite your objections and struggles, in your eyes, this is consensual sex and not rape because at some point in the past you gave your consent? You are delutional.

[Puffer Fish]

Dude, so if you agree to have sex with another dude because you were particularly experimental that night, and 2 days later this dude shows up in your house and forcefully undresses you and repeatedly thrust his penis in your ass ...

Like I previously explained to you before, "back end" sex is not a "normal" form of sex, different rules would apply.

Traditionally in older times there were special laws about this.

This is definitely not something that would be automatically expected of a woman in a marriage.

[XogGyux]

Like I previously explained to you before, "back end" sex is not a "normal" form of sex

Oh fuck you.
Don't need the judgmental preaching of an idiot that thinks rape is ok.

[Godstud]

That would obviously be a huge mitigating factor, if I had previously agreed to (and carried out) a fighting match with you before, not that long ago.

No. It would not! It would be completely irrelevant as my CONSENT was not given for the fight, in the same way that previous consent for sex is irrelevant.

Even that would be a little bit different, because this is an act that involves inflicting physical injuries.

Sexual assault CAN cause injuries, but does not always. Lack of injuries does not mean it is any more acceptable except to the most vile assholes.

Just like if a husband hurts his wife during sex, that does change the circumstances.

No, it doesn't if consent was given. Everyone hurts themselves or their spouse (accidentally, or with consent) during sex. Some people LIKE hurting each other during sex, but give each other consent to do so.

Traditionally in older times there were special laws about this.

Those times are long gone. Get over it, Incel!

Your attitude stinks. Lose it. You come off as a sick incel looking for a way to be entitled to sex.