Thailand - Draft Law About Marital Rape

chuchok, on Jan 27 2007, 04:16 AM, said:

1-
Your definition is wrong - rape is not only from men to women, but also from women to men.
There is also rape from man to man...not so rare by the way...

It seems however, defenders of the 'feminist rape ideology' do not want to face this reality - they see only helpless women and violent men.

2-
No, it is not another topic - it is closely linked to date-rape, spousal rape and similar accusations, where the 'victim' knows personally the 'aggressor'. There is no evidence, only the word of the woman.
If you accuse a man for rape, you have first to check out if this accusation is true or a fake.

We cannot 'forget' about false rape allegations during an investigation - if we do so, it would mean, that the word of the woman is automatically true and the man is automatically the liar. - This is, what feminists would like to see and what happens frequently in Western justice systems.

It seems, you also are a victim of this feminist propaganda as you presume automatically the man to be guilty in any case a woman is showing up with 'rape' or 'sexual harassment' allegations and do not care about the fact, that such a way of justice makes the man basically defendless against wrong accusations.

3-
This is not that simple.
Statutory rape for example is legally seen different - Generally, while talking about rape, the gender is irrelevant.

Why are you always mention the gender? Men as aggressors, women as victims? This is clearly biased and wrong.

Further, people are changing their mind frequently, even during the sexual contact and even after that.
How can he/she prove, he/she said no? While the other part says, he/she said yes?

In case of marriage, it is even more complicated, should such a legal term 'spousal rape' exist.
As I said before, a married couple should be supposed to have a sexual relationship. Therefore just the claim of a woman, that 'my husband raped me' and some DNA evidence cannot be considered as a proof, that this, what you call 'rape' really happened.

-----

My personal opinion is, that 'spousal rape' should not exist as a crime, and various legal systems in various countries do share my opinion.

You have to jump over your own shadow and find out by yourself, that this world has various legal systems and opinions.

Further, to consider ONLY the Western feminist biased law as the ONLY correct legal system between man and wife is rather questionable.

The Thai Ministry of Justice has the right to refuse accepting Western feminist values in its legal system.
If a woman in Thailand is worried about 'spousal rape' - do not marry....easy.

I give up. You can't argue with someone so sick as to condone rape. Yohan, you really need a psychiatrist to deal with your issues with women.

Are your daughters married Yohan?

If so, it OK for your son in law to come home drunk, have an argument with your daughter and then when she tells him "no tonight idiot". Is it OK for him to force sex with your daughter?

Voodoo Child, on Jan 27 2007, 11:43 AM, said:

And you?
First we are not talking about ANY WIFE...
We are talking about a married couple, where man and wife should be considered as equal....
Alone the way you are posting, shows me how far you are off track to consider equal rights.

You are talking about extreme cases, which few women will ever encounter and you justify a law called 'spousal rape' allowing any husband to be sent to jail without any evidence, solely out of the word of a woman.
Your way to see equality between man and wife is more than strange.

Further, it should be a basic right for any man to be allowed to defend himself against false rape allegations, despite he is not a woman but a man. - It also should be a basic right to be considered as innocent before proven guilty and not the other way.

Gender equality? Far away from it...
To use your own words, your fear of men as equals is baffling...

Voodoo Child, on Jan 27 2007, 12:43 PM, said:

You need to learn and to look around and check out if your opinion about this subject is universally acceptable.

In case of the new law in Thailand, which clearly outlaws 'spousal rape' it is not. Might be, you do not support the new Thai law rejecting the claim of 'spousal rape' - but I do.

It is up to you to call on everybody to consult a psychiatrist, because they do not share your opinion - an 'argument' frequently used by feminists...
Tell this, what you tell me, (to consult psychiatrists) to all members of the Thai government, to the Japanese government (as these are all idiots following your logic), the Malaysian government, the Singapore government, the Vietnamese government... I am not standing alone with my opinion.

Who gives you the right to criticise Asian governments, because they refuse to accept your Western feminist values?

TizMe, on Jan 27 2007, 03:21 PM, said:

1-
One of my daughter is married, she followed my advice, never to accept a man as a husband, who is drinking alcohol.
Therefore she never will have such a problem you mention above.

2-
Further, my daughters are not solving a problem with insulting remarks, like 'no, not tonight, idiot' -
but she will try it in a soft way... to call any man for any quarrel quickly an 'idiot' or other abusive terms is bad behaviour a la feminist style and is provocating a similar response from the man.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For your information: About the legal situation in Japan:

Japan does not legalize assault of a spouse, which means the use of violence.
Mistreatment of a spouse is a criminal offence.

However Japan legalize spouse-rape without assault.

As an example, if the wife has some reluctance, or doesn't say yes, but doesn't really resist, this would be considered rape without assault. Drinking together, some good and angry arguments, but going sleeping together, waking up in morning without clothings and some typical spots on the bed-sheet...
the married wife cannot claim rape in this situation in Japan, however an unmarried woman clearly can do it.

Making this situation legal makes sense because women are often unclear about their intentions.

Married couples have already accepted sex with each other generally, so there is no need to explicitly request consent for each encounter.

In the case of sex with a stranger, it is reasonable that the woman should have to clearly accept sex.
I consider the new Thai law to be very similar in context with the present Japanese regulations.

I agree with this legal view. It is absurd, that a couple legally married can claim rape and false rape allegations against each other, because of his/her unclear consent.

OK, I'll rephrase the Question.

Do you believe that if your daughter and her husband are having an argument about something (and all married couples do) is it OK, that while she is mad with him and doesn't want to even talk to him. Is it OK for him to force sex with your daughter?

romanv, on Jan 27 2007, 04:36 AM, said:

Please see the posting above for the legal situation in Japan (Thailand very similar, I guess).

It is a difference between a spouse-rape and violence against a spouse.
Unfortunately Western feminists take advantage out of mixing both together, as marriage does not have any meaning for them.

Violence against a spouse is a criminal offence in Japan.
The above case is very difficult to prove, however. What kind of proof do you have? Threatening in what form?
By some angry comments only?
Or by pointing a sword at her vagina, telling to kill her and cutting her clothings in pieces?

I guess, in case of found guilty of severe life-threatening violence like explained above, the Japanese sentence might be higher than a sentence in any European court, despite missing charges of 'spousal rape'.
I am not sure about the possible sentence in Japan in such a case, I have to look up a case of precedence to have a guideline.

For the longest time I thought the posting said, 'Daft Law About Marital Rape.' Now I see that it says 'Draft.'

thx yohan i was trying to understand where you were coming from

Nordlys, on Jan 26 2007, 11:40 PM, said:

Still better in Japan...much much better...I feel comfortable.

Strange divorce claims done by women are very common in the Western world.
There are even jokes about false rape allegations...like this one...

yohan, on Jan 27 2007, 09:46 AM, said:

my definition of rape is not wrong.It just didn't include woman/man and man/man rape.Understand?

Take the gender out of it then.You obviously can't see past your nose on this one.Understand?

rape is not just found out by DNA samples pal.In fact if the rapist uses a condom,there will be none?Understand?

If a woman is raped,there is tearing of the vaginal wall.No lube=ripped vag.Understand?

You are the biased one-eyed one sunshine.

And just because someone doesn't believe it should be legal to rape a woman does not mean they are a feminist. It means they don't condone raping anybody at any time for any reason.

I hate to get personal Yohan, I can usually shrug off your constant anti-woman tirades as just the rantings of a bitter man who has been shafted, but by condoning rape you are just making yourself out to be a big joke. I almost feel sorry for you.

I actually don't think you have the mental capacity to see past your fear and hatred of women to see how truely daft your thinking is.

This post has been edited by Voodoo Child: 28 January 2007 - 06:41 AM

Voodoo Child, on Jan 27 2007, 12:43 PM, said:

Quote

You said you give up, and now you are back again....
It seems you do not know, what you really want to do...

The psychiatrist stories is the usual feminist argument as you have nothing else to say about the subject.

Compared to your brainless few lines, I explained you in details, what 'spousal rape' means, how it is misused by Western women, and why non-Western non-feminist governments keep this term in their law-books.

Again, as I said, please email your psychiatrist recommendations and women-rape protection fantasies to the Thai government or Japanese government and to various other countries governments, which share my opinion on this legal subject.

This post has been edited by yohan: 28 January 2007 - 09:46 AM

There you go again, accusing people who don't subscribe to your fearful woman hating views as being feminists.

Sorry if it bothers you that I find rape vile, and it's proponants repugnant.

You are a sick, sad man (I use the last word loosely).

This post has been edited by Voodoo Child: 28 January 2007 - 09:53 AM

chuchok, on Jan 28 2007, 03:29 AM, said:

Interesting, that you recommend suddenly to take the gender out of it, as I suggested from beginning on.

In case of 'spousal rape' you will have problems to prove it with DNA, as a married couple is supposed to have sexual relationship anyway...but this is not the topic here.

The topic is the draft of the new Thai law about 'spousal rape' - which is very similar in interpretation to the present Japanese law.

It legalizes 'spousal rape', however it does not legalize violence against a spouse, which are 2 different legal matters. This is done out of various reasons, which I explained already in previous postings, but I try it again...

In the Western feminist world these 2 legal matters (1- spousal rape 2- violence) are mixed together to produce a grey-zone, which is widely misused by feminists and their lawyers to extort money out of men in case of divorce.
As 50 to 70 percent of marriages in the Western world are ending with divorce, this is a huge business.

This injustice is done by exploring loopholes by combination of these complicated laws, especially in the USA (VAWA-II), which have confusing regulations - and as result, it basically accepts the word of the woman as true without doubt and the man is found guilty and made defendless.

--------------------------------

I think, governments, which do not represent the Western world, have their right to create their own laws. They are not obliged to copy/paste their own justice system from chaotic US-regulations or from Sweden's gender specific laws.

Understand? It is you, who is biased one-eyed one sunshine...You just cannot understand, that other nations are creating laws, which are different from Western feminist moral values.

Voodoo Child, on Jan 28 2007, 10:50 AM, said:

It seems Voodoo Child, you are changing your mind again and again...

First telling to everybody you give up, then coming back again with the usual psychiatrist story - of course not even a single line about the topic itself...

Oh no, and now you are coming back a second time, again not even a single line about the topic itself, and you are telling me, that you feel sorry for peope like me, who reject Western feminist values and prefer to live in Asia.

What will be your next story? The story of the fat old losers living in Pattaya married to helpless poor tiny girls who are now raped by their husbands?

Oh no .....

Again, like it or not, Asian countries have the right to make their own laws...if you cannot accept that, stay in USA or sign up as a soldier in Iraq...

I suppose it's imposssible to get it through your thick, hate-filled head that Rape has nothing to do with feminism, it's to do with everyone's right to personal security.

Your posts show over and over again that you have an intense fear of women not being in a subservient position. Why? Can you not deal with them as equals? Is it too much for you? Have you found yourself not up to the task of dealing with a woman unless the law loads the dice in your favour? That tells the story of a weak, frightened man who applauds a law allowing him to force sex on someone when it's denied to him.

I have to ask myself now why someone would want a law allowing him to rape a someone. Are you so unpleasant that you must be allowed by law to rape because your hate filled tirades against women were not producing the romantic results you'd hoped for? Maybe you've already made a habit of forcing yourself on others and feel the need to justify it?

It is up to you, Voodoo Child, to complain to the Thai government, or the Japanese government or other Asian nations about how they handle the relationship between a man and a wife.

A person like you cannot understand, why nations, which do not follow the Western feminist path, dare to create different laws, because they consider the status of marriage to be different from the Western point of view.

In the Western lawbooks, marriage means only obligations for the man, only rights for the woman, regardless in what sense, this might be sexual relations, rights related to children, financial claims like alimony....

Such a simple feminist formula - to keep the husband always full responsible and to be wrong, while the wife is always considered as innocent and to be right - is not acceptable for many nations, religions, and personally, it is also not acceptable for me. It is not equality. It is man-hating, man-misusing...

All governments have their right to create their own laws. They are not obliged to copy/paste into their justice system some 'rights' from chaotic US-regulations or from Sweden's gender specific laws.

Quote

Yes, correct, the reject of 'spousal rape' in the draft of the new Thai law creates a legal situation of personal security for a married man, but also married woman against a fraudulent spouse, who tries to get away with a lucrative divorce by creating false rape allegations.

I do not see a reason, why a man has no right for personal security - or means 'everyone' for you 'women only'?

This post has been edited by yohan: 28 January 2007 - 04:01 PM

Fabricating a rape story is a crime.

I still don't see the logic in allowing someone to be raped just because someone else might make a false allegation.

Quote

Actually I cannot understand why someone would defend rape, were he not a rapist himself.

Quote

You poor pathetic embittered man. Full of hate and with a victim complex to boot. A woman as an equal scares you to death. What's it like to live life cowering at the thought of a woman with rights? Is that why you hide in Asia?

Quote

If you read above you will see several places where I stressed that everyone should have the right to personal security.

This post has been edited by Voodoo Child: 28 January 2007 - 04:23 PM