bayooooooo: Marital r'ape can not be proved. Simple.

bayooooooo: Marital r'ape can not be proved. Simple.

Shollypopz:
^^ it could be if violence was involved. Injury from battering is taken as evidence. It has been proven quite a number of times for you to make a statement like this.
[size=13pt]And NO! IT IS NOT SIMPLE![/size]

austushi1: My dear Ileke-yan.sh, what's love to u? So if i'm so much in d mood(feeling hot) and my wife declines, i should control myself or betterstil use my hand, abi? Reason with me o! Then when she's also hot n I'm not in d mood @all, she should also control herself or use her hand too, abi? Married people o!!! I thot "love" is understanding, sacrificing, loyalty, tolerating! Honestly ur very funny by saying "u know men like me"! Sure u've dated all sorts of men, to be able to know a man like me, with just a comment, and without getting close!

sexkillz: If rap'e between people who are not married can be proved, how difficult is it to prove rap'e if the same people get married and a recurrence occurs?
Pls let's be real without sentiments and stop bullshitting!

bayooooooo:

Because the issue of consent is easier to resolve if marriage is not involved.

In a marriage, consent is blurr. The wife calls it r.ape, Husband calls it mutually agreed intercourse. Where is the evidence? Don't tell me bruises because it can be attributed to something else.

jobaskia: @ileke-idi. Sorry o . How many phallus u don chop off? Sincee u said women are chopping off their hussy kini. Just asking sha

bayooooooo:

Because the issue of consent is easier to resolve if marriage is not involved.

In a marriage, consent is blurr. The wife calls it r.ape, Husband calls it mutually agreed intercourse. Where is the evidence? Don't tell me bruises because it can be attributed to something else.

Ileke-IdI:


Are you trying to make sense? How do you connect my statement to my personal self?

Would I be here freely posting if I had?



How exactly can bodily bruises be attributed to "something else"?

Trying explaining pubic bruises as something else.

Ileke-IdI:


How exactly can bodily bruises be attributed to "something else"?

Trying explaining pubic bruises as something else.

Shollypopz:
Some say the injury already existed before the r.ape occurred while some say it's self inflicted

bayooooooo:

She vowed to deal with me (apparently she's court) and to help her case, she deliberately did that. Is it unbelievable?

Ileke-IdI:


There are now methods to differentiate self-inflicted bruises from others. They're not easy, but not impossible.

The unfortunate thing with dark skin is that the bruises are harder to see.



Unbelievable if the bruises shows that it's physically impossible to inflict the bruises by herself. It's not saying it's suicidal, when it's physically impossible to pull the trigger from said angle. If he has history of violence, she'd be more believable.

If women can kill their husband (as self-defense) from rape, then marital rape should be a criminal act.

bayooooooo:

Because the issue of consent is easier to resolve if marriage is not involved.

In a marriage, consent is blurr. The wife calls it r.ape, Husband calls it mutually agreed intercourse. Where is the evidence? Don't tell me bruises because it can be attributed to something else.

sexkillz: Let me get you right. . . You rap'e your wife and bruise her up and call it mutual consent because you are married to her, and your word is final?

sexkillz: What's the emotional difference of a rape'd Single lady, and a rape'd married lady? Is the pain different? Or the tears from her eyes?

bayooooooo:

I am not advocating r.ape. It's only an animal that does such an ugly thing.

I am just arguing from a legal perspective that even though marital r.ape can indeed be committed, it's impossible to prove in court of law except the husband wittingly confess to committing such a crime.

bayooooooo:

What's crucial in proving a r.ape case has nothing to do with tears or pains. It's consent.

If mutual consent can not be established, it's a r.ape.

sexkillz: Bro, if we both agree rap'e is an animalistic act, do you think the law is right in this regard?
Seriously, who makes these dumb fccked up laws? And what makes them right?

sexkillz: I'm not talking legal here. . . We all have consciences!

bayooooooo:

I agree with you. The law is not right. But what do you suggest as alternative?

Remember, just like r.ape is real and can indeed be committed, a nasty woman can also pursue a vendetta against her husband by claiming to have been mercilessly r.aped.

How do we protect the man?

bayooooooo:

Ok. But it's difficult to have one cure all law that satisfies and protects both husband and wife. A marriage where a wife or husband is accusing other partner of such a thing in my opinion is sick. Such a marriage needs surgery. It should NEVER have reached such a level.

Shollypopz: This becomes really annoying when people start arguing based on feelings. Back your points with fact, statistics, research or past occurrences! What is morally wrong to you might be morally right to another!

Shollypopz: To back up your points bayoooo: Stereotypes about women and sex such as: "women enjoy forced sex," "women say ‘no’ when they really mean ‘yes,’" or "it's a wife's duty to have sex" have also been used to defend marital r.ape.
How many times do you want me to tell you that mariital r.ape has been proven in court?? The dilenma is not really if it can be proven but:
1.) The act of marriage is a consent between the two parties to give their bodies to each other. Now that this is true due to religion, is marital r.ape a criminal act??
2.) Is it an indulgence too much on the part of the society to inquire into the conduct of the parties during conjugal relations?
3.) Is it a violation of the human rights of the woman?

sexkillz: Do you need a proof for everything? Can you prove that a person smiling is actually happy?