Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Sex, unconventional sex, and rape

Yesterday in class I was shocked at the fact that marital rape was not considered a crime until relatively recently. I don't understand how just because two people are married, that does not mean that they are consenting to have sex at any point of any given day! A husband can most definitely rape his wife, just as Jose Arcadio Buendia raped Ursula. They were married, but Ursula was not comfortable having sex, so Jose forced her to do so. It's crazy that people who had unconventional sex, or even married "sanctified" sex for pleasure, would be sent into a circle of hell, but a man that rapes his own wife because he wants to have a child would not be punished at all. That man should AT LEAST be punished for lust, right?! I also think that Dante's punishment of lust is a little bit extreme, because it is human nature to lust. This may have been all accepted back then, but from the 21st century looking back, I find all of this insane.

2 comments:

Madison Cummings said...

I was also shocked, and honestly it is horrible that people ever thought that was acceptable. From a moral standpoint, I do not understand how people believed this was truly acceptable for so long. Regardless of your relationship with a person, no means no. I did some research on how people justified this, and i found some quotes: "the British common law view that the contract of marriage includes the husband’s “right to sex”—the wife having given consent for all time by entering the contract", "other laws, such as assault and battery, provide a raped wife with avenues for recourse that are less fraught than bringing rape charges against her husband", "a husband should be able to have sex with his wife without fear of prosecution". (http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/crime-penalties/marital-rape.htm)

There where plenty more ridiculous defenses, but over all the common theme was sexism and that women were basically viewed as their husbands property. Women really didn't have any legal protection against their husbands. Although it is now considered a crime, it is harder for women to prove, and when it is proven, the sentences are less severe. After doing this research, I have realized that, even though we have progressed since Dante's time period, rape is still not thought of as the crime that it should be.

Belin Manalle said...

I completely agree with the ridiculousness of not acknowledging marital rape as "rape" if that makes sense. However, I believe that things aren't that much different today. Just imagine that you are a judge or part of a jury about to hear a case and the woman just says "My husband raped me." That is even if the case made it that far. What would you think? Although I wish to think that it would play out otherwise, I believe that most people in that situation would agree that the woman was being a bit absurd. I guess most people just believe that you wouldn't marry someone if you weren't going to or didn't want to have sexual relations with him. It's a common assumption that this occurs in any marriage but not everyone is okay with it. As we learned in the presentation during assembly the other week, it is only legal if consent is given EVERY time. Even if a couple is involved in sexual acts normally, one time that one of them doesn't agree is considered rape.