Categories
a voice for men antifeminism creepy evil sexy ladies evil wives excusing abuse marital rape misogyny MRA rape rape culture reactionary bullshit

A Voice for Men writer: “Marriage is a licence for sex,” and laws against marital rape will destroy marriage itself

Protesters at anti-rape demonstration in India
Protesters at an anti-rape demonstration in India

A Voice for Men seems to joining the ranks of the marital rape deniers. In a post on the site today (archived here), AVFM contributor Amartya Talukdar attacks proposed laws to criminalize marital rape in India as part of an evil feminist plot to “criminalize marriage” itself. Because, in his mind, there is no such thing as marital rape.

In the post, he offers a muddled assortment of “arguments” against the very idea of marital rape. Echoing the, er, logic of sci-fi author and far-right crank Vox Day, Talukdar explains that once a woman marries a man she gives up her right to say “no” to sex with her husband.

The concept of marital rape is an oxymoron. Marriage is a licence for sex. A woman who does not want to have sex with her husband should separate from him and file for divorce.

Indeed, as he sees it, saying “no” to a spouse’s demands for sex is the real crime.

[M]arriage is where both partners should seek sexual fulfillment. Denying each other sex is a crime except in exceptional circumstances. This applies to both man and woman. In respecting mutual duties and responsibilities lies the successful marital relationship.

As long as a husband isn’t literally beating his wife, Talukdar suggests, she should simply submit to his demands — and shouldn’t even think about calling the cops on him.

Marriage is a partnership of trust. If a man should not subject his wife to physical pain, the wife should not subject him to the rigors of the criminal justice system.

Denying a husband sex is an evil act, because it might force the poor fellow to resort to masturbation — or worse!

What should a man do if he is regularly denied sex by his wife? Should he masturbate, visit brothels or should be commit adultery?

I’m going to take door number one here, and say, yes, it would be better for a man to masturbate than for him to RAPE HIS WIFE. (Having an affair or going to a brothel are also much better options than RAPING SOMEONE.)

But as Talukdar sees it, married men are essentially paying for a lifetime of sex-on-demand, and it’s a woman’s duty to live up to her side of this supposed bargain.

Rights come with duties. A woman in India has a right to maintenance even when husband is sick, and incapable of earning or is unemployed. He is duty bound to pay his wife alimony even after divorce. The Indian Courts have held that a man must “beg, borrow or steal” but he must maintain his wife. Then why shouldn’t a man have right to have coitus with his wife if he is duty bound to maintain her?

By this logic, divorced men paying alimony to their ex-wives should also have the right to demand sex from them, but never mind.

Since marital rape, in his mind, doesn’t exist, Talukdar resorts to conspiracy theory to explain why anyone would want to pass laws criminalizing marital rape in India. In his mind, it’s part of a longstanding plot by feminists to “criminalize” marriage and thus destroy it once and for all.

In India marriage is a sacrament. However, feminists have always viewed marriage as an institution that enslaves women. Hence they want this institution to be destroyed. …

Laws like no fault divorce, domestic violence, marital rape, alimony and child support have already made marriage an extinct institution in many countries. Hence caution must be exercised before Indian Law makers copy such laws.

In the world you and I live in, marriage is “extinct” in precisely zero countries. Talukdar, like most AVFMers, seems to live in a world of his own imagining.

Talukdar’s post is another new low in a long history of new lows from AVFM.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

92 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Supernova
Supernova
5 years ago

AVFM will post stuff like this, call women who dress revealingly “kiniving bitches” who are “begging” to be raped, talk about how they would vote “not guilty” in a jury for a rape trial even when faced with an overwhelming amount of evidence that the man on trial was guilty….

And then they’ll go off and deny that rape culture is a thing.

Bina
Bina
5 years ago

If a marriage licence does not specify, in writing, a right to sex on demand by either spouse, then no, it is NOT a legal licence for sex.

See how that works?

Spindrift
Spindrift
5 years ago

“Then why shouldn’t a man have right to have coitus with his wife if he is duty bound to maintain her?”

Isn’t he duty bound to provide for his children too? I guess he gets to rape them aswell?

kellyrtillson
5 years ago
Reply to  Spindrift

Don’t give them ideas!!

Wetherby
Wetherby
5 years ago

The really shocking thing about marital rape is that it wasn’t recognised as a crime in the UK even as recently as 24 years ago, and I don’t think we were extreme outliers in this.

zugthemegasaurus
5 years ago

“However, feminists have always viewed marriage as an institution that enslaves women.”

Gee, I wonder how they ever got an idea like that?

Banana Jackie Cake, the Best Jackie and Cake! Yum! (^v^)
Banana Jackie Cake, the Best Jackie and Cake! Yum! (^v^)
5 years ago

What about when the wife wants sex but the husband doesn’t? Is it still not rape then?

ronanwills
5 years ago

“However, feminists have always viewed marriage as an institution that enslaves women. Hence they want this institution to be destroyed. …”

If feminists didn’t like marriage, wouldn’t they just…not get married?

Penny
Penny
5 years ago

Now I understand why these guys started picking on Jews. According to Judaism sex is a woman’s right and a man’s duty. If a man doesn’t provide it, she can divorce him….

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

Beliefs like this one are a reason, among so many, why feminism is necessary.

I do agree with the writer of this post on one thing, though: that women whose husbands harbor such vile notions about marriage should divorce them. That would include a good portion of the American Christian fundamentalists (among others), whose obsession with the wifely submission is rooted in the same mindset which makes marriage no different than sexual slavery for the woman.

I like (not really) how the marital rape apologists throw the “equality clause” (“This applies to both man and woman.”) into their arguments, trying to make their true message more palatable somehow. That always reminds me of Anatole France famous quote:

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”

Ktoryx
Ktoryx
5 years ago

“If a marriage licence does not specify, in writing, a right to sex on demand by either spouse, then no, it is NOT a legal licence for sex. ”

Even then, you can’t sign away your right to bodily autonomy just like you can’t sign yourself into slavery. There are some human rights that you simply cannot sign away.

Tanya
5 years ago

Just because I’m in the mood to be pedantic – SACRAMENT is a christian thing. So no, it’s doubtful that “marriage is a sacrament in India”.

Bina
Bina
5 years ago

“If a marriage licence does not specify, in writing, a right to sex on demand by either spouse, then no, it is NOT a legal licence for sex. ”

Even then, you can’t sign away your right to bodily autonomy just like you can’t sign yourself into slavery. There are some human rights that you simply cannot sign away.

That’s true, too. As I recall, wasn’t there a case a few years ago where a control freak drew up an incredibly detailed (to the point of inanity) “slave contract” for a woman he wanted to dominate, and wasn’t it brought up in court when she sued him, and proven to be not legally binding? I seem to recall that there was…

Daniel Ross
5 years ago

Wetherby: The last US states to finally criminalize marital rape did so in 1993, so no, you’re hardly alone. In fact, South Carolina *still* has a law on the books specifying higher standards of evidence in prosecuting marital rape than other forms.

freemage
5 years ago

Also, let’s keep in mind this India. Arranged marriages are still very much a thing in much of the country. In modernized urban areas, this has become an odder process with at least something that almost kinda-sorta resembles consent (basically, when they come of age, the families push them to marry someone, but there’s some degree of choice in whom they marry), but in the rural regions, it’s still more of the old-school variety.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Talakdur writes that husbands are also obligated to provide sex for their wives. The logical conclusion of this is that it’s okay for a wife to rape her husband.

I thought the MRM was supposed to be concerned about male rape and domestic violence victims? I guess in the mind of Paul Elam it’s okay to promote rape and violence against violence against men as long as you promote rape and violence against women harder?

Any lurking MRA want to explain to me how this represents human rights activism in any way?

M.
M.
5 years ago

I like (not really) how the marital rape apologists throw the “equality clause” (“This applies to both man and woman.”) into their arguments, trying to make their true message more palatable somehow. That always reminds me of Anatole France famous quote:

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”

And the modern equivalent I often hear from Republicans: “Marriage is already equal because straight people and [homophobic slurs] can both marry somebody of the opposite gender!”

marinerachel
marinerachel
5 years ago

If its an aspect of someone’s marriage (or whatever relationship they have) that the two parties have sex with one another, virtually everyone would be understanding if someone became hurt and dissatisfied, maybe ending the relationship, when that aspect of it was revoked by the other party.

What people tend not to be understanding of is the notion, if one party stops willingly engaging in sex with the other, just fuck them anyways.

“I want a sexual relationship with my partner” is a perfectly good reason to change partners. Its not a good reason to fuck an unwilling partner.

Tina S
Tina S
5 years ago

Familiar. Have sex with him or he cheats. Sex becomes a duty, not a pleasure until eventually she won’t feel any sexual desire at all. She’ll withhold just to try to save herself then beat herself up for being a failure as a wife.

No, each person’s body belongs to them and them only. You’ve no idea how long it’s taken me to finally learn that.

Marital rape exists.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

I know that if I had the option to get married and leave myself without any legal recourse for rape, versus not getting married and retaining that recourse, I might want to choose not to get married. It seems like legal marital rape is a bigger threat to marriage than illegal marital rape.

Of course, India is going through cultural changes right now that are eroding male privilege, and shit like this should not be read as an attempt to advance a logical and reasoned argument in support of a particular position. This is the normal railing and screaming that can always be heard when male privilege is reduced, because some men just can’t handle it when that happens. If men can’t go out and sexually harass women at will and then go home and rape their wives, what will the world come to??? It will come to a less convenient world for terrible men, that’s what, and terrible men will always complain about that.

sunnysombrera
5 years ago

@POM
Couldn’t have put it better myself.

katz
5 years ago

Hey David, the #howtospotafeminist hashtag is ripe grounds for mockery right now. Confused Cats Against Feminism would be proud.

Spaceman
Spaceman
5 years ago

Big bag of “Nope” on this front.

My wife in no way owes me a damn thing when it comes to intimacy and sex. We both do it because we both enjoy it with each other. When she says “no” that is it. The conversation is done, I move on and we discuss other things.

I fear for the future wives and husbands of people who believe like the OP. The person you marry should be your best friend first, not your sex doll.

Leisha Young
Leisha Young
5 years ago

Honestly, do these people see woman as human? Or just as vaginas with women attached to them? I just can’t fathom they way they think.

PussyPowerTantrum, the Lousy Flouncer
PussyPowerTantrum, the Lousy Flouncer
5 years ago

This is all the more disturbing because sexual willingness is a casualty in many abusive marriages, with one spouse withdrawing from the other due to physical and/or emotional cruelty. And yes, if a marriage is irretrievably broken down it should end, but it doesn’t seem to me that licensing rape in that situation would improve anything. In fact marital rape would make it harder for the abuse to stop and the marriage to be saved, or for the victim to recover after the relationship is dissolved. So again it looks like marital rape is the far greater threat to marriage than lack of sex.

Josh
Josh
5 years ago

@ Leisha

They do view women as human, but as a lesser breed of sub-human, made specifically to pleasure them.

Banana Jackie Cake, the Best Jackie and Cake! Yum! (^v^)
Banana Jackie Cake, the Best Jackie and Cake! Yum! (^v^)
5 years ago

Wouldn’t sex when your spouse is willing be, you know, better? I mean, they said right here:

“[M]arriage is where both partners should seek sexual fulfillment”

So wouldn’t it be unfulling for at least one partner if rape was involved? Wouldn’t that mean they aren’t doing their martial duty?

lkeke35
5 years ago

@Leisha Young: I think you mean ” with extra stuff attached to the vagina”. Cuz remember, they really do see them as just walking vaginas.
That extra stuff that’s attached keeps doing things like complaining, talking and whining about being treated as a person and that makes their boners sad.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

Yeah, I don’t even have the words for this fuckery.

MRA: “Rape culture’s not a thing, stupid fucking femicommunazis!”

MRA: “Men should be able to sex their wives whenever they want, regardless of if the wife wants it or not, because it’s a woman’s DUTY to sex her husband whenever he wants (and I guess you feeemales can sex men whenever you want too).”

Can we move on to something more fun to make fun of and doesn’t make me want to punch my computer screen? Like the #HowToSpotAFeminist tag?

Or why Joss Whedon left Twitter amidst feminists asking him why he shunned Black Widow and turned her into a “I can’t have babbbieees I’m a monnnssstter” and Bruce Banner’s personal therapist?

Oh, and we can’t forget Tony’s rape joke (The bit where he said he’d reinstate the rule that kings can sleep with a woman on her honeymoon, though he used the Latin name for it), and the bit where a dude falls on to a woman’s breasts as a “joke”?

And now Gators are supporting him in a very sorry attempt to make themselves look better while hissing at feminists. “Because good people be nice to people they don’t agree with!” seems to be the consensus, which makes me laugh a big viking laugh of irony. Because of the obvious, and that they think it’s the feminists that chased Joss off of twitter, when he says here that he’s never really been a fan of twitter in the first place and only joined to promote an older movie.

BritterSweet
5 years ago

Well, his version of marriage *is* an institution that enslaves women and should be destroyed.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

No kidding, BritterSweet.

Ponder this:

“Laws like no fault divorce, domestic violence, marital rape, alimony and child support have already made marriage an extinct institution in many countries. Hence caution must be exercised before Indian Law makers copy such laws.”

Gotta feel his pain. The good ol’ days when a husband could rape and beat his wife, and abscond with no consequences when tired of her and the kiddos, are nearly gone, no thanks to the evil feminazis and SJWs. The horror (a.k.a oppressive matriarchy, OMG!).

Silky
5 years ago

@ Banana Jackie Cake

Unfortunately, a lot of guys seem to like it when it’s clear the woman is just doing it because she “has to,” not because she wants to. Or so numerous comments on YouTube by different people would lead me to believe.

cheerioincident
5 years ago

>”He is duty bound to pay his wife alimony even after divorce.”

Well, it’s not really alimony before the divorce… (sorrynotsorry for the pedantry)

Michael (contemplativemoorings)

“Rights come with duties”. This maybe be the most abject falsity of the lot. Duties by definition are intentionally taken on in exchange for something else or in accordance with some moral code. Amartya’s logic seems to be, however, that Rights are given to women in exchange for their obedience. Disgusting really.

cretaceouskitteh78
cretaceouskitteh78
5 years ago

Dude’s Twitter feed is pretty boring but if you scroll back far enough you find he’s also a Holocaust denier that thinks Hillary Clinton is a Jew. Not even joking. They sure know how to pick a winner over there at AVFM!

rugbyyogi
5 years ago

OBVIOUSLY, no one, no one is under any obligation to have sex with anyone else.

HOWEVER, I always find this a sore subject. Some people in this thread are talking about everyday marital refusal or a bit of ‘not tonight dear’.

For those who have not had serious issues with a disparity between sexual desires, it’s probably quite hard to understand how utterly demoralising it is to be yoked to someone who seems otherwise happy and healthy but will not have sex with you while expecting you to be faithful and content. I do think that spouses have a responsibility to look after each other’s sexual needs and to support each other in all kinds of ways. I don’t think spouses should be saying no to each other’s normal requests for intimacy far more often than they’re saying yes. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with one spouse saying that they’re unhappy about the amount of sex in a relationship or being a bit peeved about it when it falls far, far short of normality.

But this is a long, long way from marital rape. Which must obviously be against the law. And there are many, many examples of brutal rape and sexual assault committed by husbands against wives. And there are many greyer areas, including coercion and emotional abuse. But I get really uncomfortable when people who probably are having a decent amount of sex say “If my partner says no, then that’s just fine and dandy.” Implying everyone else should be the same.

A no must be respected, but it does not have to be accepted gladly. If you can accept a no gladly, then you’re probably getting laid on a fairly regular basis in your marriage or you have similarly matching low libidos.

By the way, I’m the woman in a sexless marriage. After years of begging and internalising the rejection, I cheated. No regrets except I should have done it sooner. Part of my personal feminist awakening is embracing my own sexuality – I like sex, with a man, and I expect it on reasonably regular basis as part of a healthy, respectful, cooperative marriage. I do not think there is anything wrong with a man saying the same.

The problem with the MRA dudes is that they don’t really want a healthy, cooperative and respectful marriage in the first place. They want a wife who submits and labours with adoration. And they don’t see anything wrong with dishing abuse in an attempt to get it.

Penny Psmith
Penny Psmith
5 years ago

Ugh, that’s sick.

It’s as if they see ‘sex’ as a continual condition, not, you know, a specific occurence (or a series of them). It just… I mean, just… how? You can’t just ‘agree to all sex’, because each occurence is different. Like you can’t ‘agree to all meals’, because sometimes you won’t like the food, or you’re not hungry.

Penny Psmith
Penny Psmith
5 years ago

@rugbyyogi

Obviously, what you’re describing is a different situation. I don’t have any such experience, but it seems like the solution for something like that should lie mainly in talking to each other to figure out a solution – be it adding a third person to the relationship (which doesn’t have to be ‘cheating’, polyamourous relationships are a thing, after all), trying to ‘adjust’ the two people’s needs in some way, or separating. It can’t be easy, but like you said, the key is a healthy, cooperative and respectful relationship.
Good on you for figuring out your needs; I hope your relationship is doing well now that you figured out a solution.

boogerghost
boogerghost
5 years ago

Most of the time it’s easy for me to sit here and laugh at how ridiculous and out-of-touch these clowns are… but every now and then it hits me how many people in the world who think like this have actual power, actual power over actual women… and then I have to pace around the room taking deep breaths and punching my hands.

Everything everyone above said.

1. This shows ZERO respect for male (and non-binary) rape victims, cause obviously men can’t be raped cause they always want every conceivable sex act all the time, as long as it’s not with a dude or a fatty. And yet imagine how AVFM would react if a story of an Indian wife forcibly pegging her husband ever broke. Especially if she were – horrors – fat! That would be the fault of rapey male-rape-denying female-rape-exaggerating cow-worshipping feminism for sure. This argument is basically “blue balls: NOT COOL BITCHES” taken to a faux legal/human rightsy level.

2. This assumes brides (and grooms) have 100% free choice in whom they marry.

3. Even if you’re only counting rape and not other forms of sexual assault in this, there are INFINITE ways and times and situations in which even a chauvinistic abuser might agree it’s wrong to force or pressure someone into intercourse. And some newfangled human rights pushers are even saying you should only have sex when you actually FEEL like it! Imagine that! But seriously, even husbands who expect their wives to lie there and tolerate it and don’t really care about pleasing them know that there are like, MEDICAL reasons, or trauma, or maybe you’re at like a PTA meeting…

And if you DO count other kinds of assault, I mean, like, that would mean signing a marriage contract is agreeing to EVERY conceivable act. If we can’t convince these MRAs that it’s acceptable not to want to get vanilla-assaulted, maybe they’ll believe that not everyone likes getting pooped on or having their balls popped.

rugbyyogi
5 years ago

@Penny – I can see that your comment comes from a supportive place, so please don’t take this the wrong way, but I’m sure on reflection you’d realise that I and 99% of people in my position had considered the ‘talking it out’ approach already and I do have a good idea of whether or not my spouse would be open to the idea of polyamorous solutions (he isn’t). I would also say that I think it’s a very, very rare relationship that does better by involving a third party and no relationship carries on well when one partner’s sexual and emotional needs are neglected for a significant amount of time.

Penny Psmith
Penny Psmith
5 years ago

I apologise for talking out of my rear end on something I have no experience with; thanks for taking it so well.

sn0rkmaiden
5 years ago

@rugbyyogi,

I can empathize with your situation, I’ve been on the receiving end of sexual rejection more than a few times and it can cut a person’s self esteem to shreds. The reason I live with a non partner and not a partner is because fifteen years ago he decided he didn’t want sex anymore, period. Once it became clear he wouldn’t be changing his mind I ended the relationship but we stayed friends.

We’ve kind of drifted into sharing our lives together because my attempts to find a happy relationship elsewhere didn’t work out. It’s a compromise. And ‘talking’ is not the magic wand a lot of people seem to think it is, for one thing the other person has to be willing to listen.

I also categorically state that marital/partner rape is wrong, but at the same time a relationship of mismatched sex drives is going to have problems. I’m not talking about someone not being in the mood once in a while.

While the OP sounds like a repugnant individual, I suspect underneath the entitlement and misogyny there’s a real fear that he will make a commitment to someone only to find himself denied intimacy, while expected to hold up his traditional, patriarchal side of the bargain. He needs to have it explained to him that the solution to one’s insecurities is not to deny other people bodily autonomy.

marinerachel
marinerachel
5 years ago

Sexual incompatibility played a major role in my divorce. I love him profoundly. We were not compatible as intimate partners though. You can’t talk through fundamental differences in personalities and needs. Amongst other things, his lack of desire to have sex with me was devastating.

It would have been delusional of both of us to think bringing a third party into the relationship would resolve the dissatisfaction I was experiencing and not at all harm what good we had so we never pursued that route.

To prevent further hurt and save what we did have, we ended the marriage. There’s still sadness sometimes (I hate myself for having been dissatisfied with him and for having hurt him so profoundly) but for the most part we just dearly love and enjoy one another.

Rhoda
Rhoda
5 years ago

It’s the 21st century. If your partner does not satisfy you then you should end the relationship sooner rather then later.
I believe it is always better to break up with someone then to cheat on them.

proxieme
proxieme
5 years ago

rugby & marine: I get what you all are saying, I think. In my first marriage, my now-ex would regularly refuse intimacy and then masturbate to porn. We had sex maybe 1x a month (tops) and always at my insistence. But it was just the cherry topping to a shit-pie relationship. I didn’t realize how thoroughly broken I’d been until after he left me mid-deployment for a contractor he’d met.

Really, though, it was the best favor he could have done for me. A few months into my life as an impoverished Mom living in a single wide trailer while working full time for very little money and finishing my degree (our first had been an, “Oh…so…turns out I suck at taking birth control” baby [prox’s clarification: Turns out that it’s actually that hormonal BC doesn’t really work very well for me; see: our second child; secondary evidence: I consistenty begin menstruating a month after childbirth even when exclusively breast-feeding – my body’s just like, “Shut up with that no-baby nonsense!” until I stick an IUD in it] when I was a Junior and we were dating) I realized that I was happier than I’d been in years.

My second marriage – with a man who respects me, treats me like a fekkin’ queen (-gasp- amirite, MRAs?), and actually wants to have sex with me – has already lasted longer than my first and it still feels brand new.

Lesson learned: Life’s too short and precious to be spent in misery. It’s one thing – a good thing, in my book – to stand with an beloved spouse through a difficult time. It’s entirely another to try to shoehorn happiness into a place it just doesn’t want to be.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

I do think that spouses have a responsibility to look after each other’s sexual needs and to support each other in all kinds of ways. I don’t think spouses should be saying no to each other’s normal requests for intimacy far more often than they’re saying yes.

But this is a long, long way from marital rape.

Nope. Your first statement here is describing rape culture, and nobody should be surprised when rape culture leads to rape.

Who gets to decide what is a “normal” request and what is abnormal? You’re talking about a mismatch of sexual drives here. Wanting to have sex literally every day, sometimes multiple times a day, is completely normal for almost everyone at some point in their lives, and it is the norm for some people the majority of their lives. Wanting to have sex never is also completely normal for almost everyone at some phase, and being asexual one’s entire life is a thing, a thing that some people object to having labeled “abnormal.” Who, in your world, gets to be the arbiter of normality, and what happens when you fall outside it, as you inevitably will at some point because people’s sex drives change over the courses of their lives?

Which must obviously be against the law.

Why do you think that, if you think spouses have a responsibility to one another and should not be refusing one another’s “normal” requests?

And there are many, many examples of brutal rape and sexual assault committed by husbands against wives.

Rape includes more than “brutal” attacks. What the fuck.

And there are many greyer areas, including coercion and emotional abuse.

I’m going to pile a big mountain of “nope” onto this. Having sex with someone who does not want to have sex with you is rape. It is rape no matter how you accomplish the sexual contact, even if it’s “only” coercion. Again: What the fuck, dude.

But I get really uncomfortable when people who probably are having a decent amount of sex say “If my partner says no, then that’s just fine and dandy.” Implying everyone else should be the same.

And I get really uncomfortable when someone starts redefining rape to suit their own purposes. I understand that you’re in a situation you don’t like, but people who have been raped by coercion and emotional abuse are also in situations they don’t like, and you don’t have a right to tell those people that what they suffered was not “really” rape.

And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with one spouse saying that they’re unhappy about the amount of sex in a relationship or being a bit peeved about it when it falls far, far short of normality.

And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with calling off the relationship, breaking up, and getting a divorce. Which is your remedy when you and your partner are sexually incompatible and it is irreconcilable. Your remedy is NOT to rape your spouse, and it is NOT to come onto the internet and lecture to rape victims that their rapes didn’t count.

schwadevivre
5 years ago

Right, so do these guys think that a woman could demand sex from her husband and, if he refuses, tase him, tie him up pump him full of alprostadil (an erectile dysfunction drug) and have wild sex until she is completely satisfied?

I don’t think so, but if they are being consistent they should think that’s OK.

… sorry I tried to say that MRAs might be consistent …

dhag85
5 years ago

I think Pakman or someone in the comment thread under the Pakman/VD story had this response to the “marriage implies consent to sex” argument, which I thought was almost perfect. Basically, if marriage implies consent to sex, that would go both ways. And what specific sexual actions do you consent to by entering marriage? Are they willing to take this to the logical conclusion? Because somehow I think they might not agree that they’ve consented to, let’s say, pegging, just through getting married.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

@schwadevivre:

They obviously don’t give any thought to their lip service “equality clause” and its implications, because somehow the idea of forcing a husband to perform his “marital duties” does not occur to them, in spite of inserting their assurances that their reasoning applies to both sexes equally.

We never hear from an MRA / redpiller who’d admit to rejecting his wife sexually for whatever reason and feeling bad about it (*and* advocating marital rape as a solution to her sexual frustration), or even admitting the real possibility of this scenario, although the instances of husbands shunning sex are quite common.