Thailand - Draft Law About Marital Rape

yohan, on Jan 26 2007, 08:22 PM, said:

Whatever it takes, Yohan, to end a situation that cannot be reconciled.
RUN does not mean to get out of one own house, which probably is jointly owned.
Run means, get out of the situation.

Voodoo Child, on Jan 28 2007, 05:20 PM, said:

Is it really? Then you should stand up and demand the same prison sentence for this crime for a woman in the same way you are doing it for rape crimes of men.

Quote

You still do not - but I do. This is because you still cannot jump over your Western feminist shadow.
I do not defend rape, but I defend the present draft of the new Thai law, regarding 'spousal rape'.
We are talking here about 'spousal rape' only. We are talking here about the draft of the new Thai law only.

Quote

I am living in Japan legally as a Japanese permanent resident since 1976. I do not hide - sorry, you are wrong informed.
What about you? Where are you living?

My opinion is exactly the same as the present legal situation here in Japan, and the same of the draft of the new Thai law.
I am posting MY opinion about the new draft of the Thai law regarding 'spousal rape' - if you agree with me or not does not matter. Why should I care?

Quote

Everyone SHOULD? ...yes, should...should be....but some have and some have not....this is everywhere same in this world.
For example in Iraq, where the US-Army is busy to offer everyone personal security at gunpoint.
For sure, people in Iraq are not worried about 'spousal rape' - they are worried about other aspects of personal security...

yohan, on Jan 28 2007, 04:39 PM, said:

Rape is rape.

You defend a law allowing it.

Why would anyone who is not a rapist defend a law allowing rape?

This post has been edited by Voodoo Child: 28 January 2007 - 05:50 PM

what i dont understand is that you seem to be defending non mutually consensual sex.

a couple that is legally married is considered differently from an unmarried couple, under this law.

it makes no sense to me.

i grant you that sometimes the accusation of rape is misused, but this does not mean that it should never be considered a crime just becasue a couple are married.

TizMe, on Jan 27 2007, 06:18 PM, said:

Do you believe that if your son and his wife are having an argument about something (and all married couples do) it is OK, that while he is mad with her and doesn't want to even talk to her, to go to the police and and accuse him of rape, in the name of revenge, and he should be unable to defend himself? Is it okay that he is just thrown in prison for 20 years of his life without a fair trial? Is that what you saw in his future all those years you were raising him?

Voodoo Child, on Jan 28 2007, 06:49 PM, said:

Maybe we are talking about 2 different matters.

May I ask for your definition of 'rape'.

Sorry for that. After reading all this and then the above statement, I think there must be a misunderstanding somewhere.

romanv, on Jan 28 2007, 06:56 PM, said:

Yes, under this law (in Thailand, Japan, and other countries) concerning 'reject of spousal rape' - a married couple is considered differently from an unmarried couple.

You said, this makes no sense to you, that a couple legally married is considered differently from an unmarried couple.

So let me say, it makes no sense to me, that a legally married couple and an unmarried couple should be considered as equal.

Why should a married couple be considered in the same way as an unmarried couple?
If 'married' = 'unmarried', what would be the meaning of 'married'?

Yes, you are right, the accusation of rape (any kind) is misused, not only 'sometimes' but very frequently, daily routine ...
The question is now, how to change this law of 'spousal rape', which is generating false rape allegations so that it cannot be misused...

Any idea?

mbk, on Jan 28 2007, 07:40 PM, said:

It is difficult for me to explain to somebody, who is maybe sitting on a ranch in Texas, the difference between American and Thai law.

Quote

He still thinks, I am hiding in Asia ....olala...

QUOTE(TizMe @ Jan 27 2007, 06:18 PM) 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?

yohan, on Jan 28 2007, 08:31 PM, said:

I cant fathom that anybody doesn't think that both of these senerios is WRONG.

How can you condone the rape of your daughter, just to protect the off chance that she MIGHT be telling false accusation?

TizMe, on Jan 28 2007, 09:13 PM, said:

You are not supposed to think about that she MIGHT be telling false accusations,
this would be clearly against the law.

How can you condone the prison sentence of your innocent son, because you, his father, are supporting a law, which is protecting his wife?

As I already said, I would not condone the false imprisonment of anyone. You however do condone the rape of your daughter, as long as it is her husband that does it.

There has always been wrongful imprisonment for all types of crime. So using your logic we should legalise murder, theft etc, just so that we don't accidentally imprison an innocent person.

yohan, on Jan 28 2007, 06:01 PM, said:

what is the meaning of married, i dont know what the legal definition is, but its besides the point.

you seem to be saying that the difference is that one partner can force the other to have sex and not be charged with rape.

why should part of the meaning of being married allow you to be given a legal right to force your partner to have sex with you? to me thats the crux of the matter. if you are not getting laid in the marriage, then divorce the route not forced sex (and this should be grounds for divorce if it currently isnt)

as far as false rape alleagtions go, ok i dont know too much about the stats, or how the law deal with it currently in western society or others, but if it can be proved that the rape allegations are false and put forward malicious intent, then there should be an equivilant penalty imposed on the accuser.



isnt this the correct way to approach the subject, rather than give a legal right to forced sexual acts?

TizMe, on Jan 28 2007, 09:58 PM, said:

You are trying to go off topic, but anyway, it is difficult to send the dead victim into prison instead of the killer.
It is however easy to send the husband into prison instead of his wife, as no evidence is required except the word of the woman, while the word of the husband does not count = equality made in USA...

About legalize murder, innocent people in prison....etc you should not address the Thai government, but another government, whose president is claiming to be inspired by God.

Quote

This is empty talk.
You do, as you are supportive to laws, which are an open invitation to slander and accuse married men without any evidence and deny their rights for a legal and fair defense, solely out of the word of one woman.
You even are supportive to export such laws from feminist countries like USA and EU into Asian countries, which should have the right to decide about their own laws.
I did not notice anything so far, that you are willing to protect innocent men.

romanv, on Jan 28 2007, 10:25 PM, said:

1-
The question is, what means for a married couple 'forced sex'? What means 'rape'? What is 'violence'?

This is a grey-zone used against the man in the Western feminist world for lucrative divorce, as there is no clear definition even what is rape, what is forced sex. Oral sex is also considered as rape btw..and do not ask me what all is considered as rape, to touch a sleeping woman with your hands, or to cuddle with a drunken woman and so on...

Most people in Asia will agree, that 'married' and 'unmarried' is not the same...(maybe it is the same for most European and American people, might be)

In fact, the 'reject of spouse rape' regulation in Japan is protecting the husband not against violence, but against grey-zone rape-charges.
To say it again, it does not protect the husband against mistreatment of the wife or violence against the wife.

2-
There is no equal penalty imposed on the accuser in false rape allegations, because the accuser is a woman - one of the strongest points of complaints by the MRA. There are men, who served even decades in prison, innocent, and nothing happened with the female accuser...except some social work and a small fine.

Recently some police departments are filing lawsuits and demanding financial compensation from the 'victim' for investigating of rape-crimes, which never took place.

yohan, on Jan 28 2007, 05:33 PM, said:

Forcing sex upon someone without their consent, as you previously stated should be legal.

Quote

ok so what you are unhappy about is the definition of rape.

however should not the mra focus on this grey area and try to better law written than just not recognising rape within marriage? it sounds like a very dangerous law and i just cant get myself to support something like this, theres a principle involved here that i think should be respected no matter what.

I am unhappy about the definition of 'rape' in the Western world.
http://abcnews.go.co...e...3362&page=1
For example, I do not consider this as rape or mistreatment...nothing to read about violence, nothing to read about penis-vagina...
still this makes a 10 years prison sentence for a minor.
It is a good example about what is a grey area...

I am also not happy about, that 'married' and 'unmarried' as a couple is considered the same in the Western world concerning sexual relationship. -

A married man, who by law is obliged to ask the consent even for the smallest sexual related approach from his own wife in the same form as talking to an unknown woman or even a prostitute, is a poor regrettable man.
Even if he agrees to that, he is brainwashed by a feminist society.

To be politically correct, to avoid 'spousal rape' means, that a married man in the Western world, who wants to do any sexual approach to his own wife, has to do the following to avoid any risk of being considered a rapist:

0- to understand, that a married wife and a paid prostitute has to be treated equally.
1- check out, if she is able to consent (even if she says yes, but was drinking 2 beers, maybe she is not able to consent)
2- asking her, if she is willing to accept his sexual approach and explaining to her what he intends to do
3- as a woman might change her mind (even prostitutes after taking the money have the right to change their mind, so why not the own wife) it is recommended to ask for a letter or consent signed by her.
4- record the conversation on a tape or camera
5 -keep the camera running all time, because the woman still might change her mind, and the man is obliged to stop immediately.
6 -Kiss your wife, touch her face and hair and hold her hands and tell her 'I am back from work, you look nice'
7- keep the recording, as even after all, the woman might claim rape...and you will be defendless.

If you are not doing that, the wife as any right to claim 'rape'...because you cannot approach an unknown woman, just kiss her unexpected, hold her hands, touch her face and hair and telling her, she looks nice...
And do not forget married = unmarried, a woman you know = a woman you see the first time...all is based on equality.

Maybe I forgot something in this list, but as I said, I am living in Japan and I am married.
For me in Japan, #6 is legally OK and I go ahead, no rape or sexual harassment charge of the own wife is possible.
In USA I would be a rapist ...

I know, what is the definition of rape in feminist countries - The MRA movement is complaining about it - however some men do not want to listen - see this thread.
Most men are getting aware of all these legal problems after divorce or after they are sentenced to a prison term.

About a better law? About what countries you are talking?
I am here in Japan and the 'reject of spousal rape' is a good law - it eliminates all possible non-violent bullsh*t rapes accusations for a married husband from his own wife, and on the other side, it protects the wife against mistreatment, as 'spousal violence' is not included in the 'spousal rape'. I do not know a better law - it is just fine.

What is your idea of a better law?

yohan, on Jan 29 2007, 01:15 PM, said:

And neither did the court. He was aquitted of the rape charge (so the jury agreed with you. This was not rape.)

He was however also charged with aggravated child molestation. IE sex with a minor."the girl, she was 15 and — willing or not — could not consent legally that night."

10 years might have been a bit harsh in this case, but I'm sure for every harsh sentence there is 3 or 4 lenient sentences.

This post has been edited by TizMe: 29 January 2007 - 11:39 AM

Quote

As I said, this is all a grey zone...he was charged for rape and convicted as child molester...I do not know what of these 2 choices is the better one...
Here in Japan the age of consent is 13, so we do not have stupid cases like that...
There is little reason to say, only the boy is responsible and the 2 girls, age 15 and 17 are not responsible for anything and are the poor victims...

The lenient sentences are given usually to women, like this bitch, who fabricated evidence for false rape allegation...
http://news.bbc.co.u...don/6277969.stm

As you said, 10 years is a bit harsh, but he is a black minor-age boy, and this is for a white woman, 6 years...just compare, what he did and what she did...
----------------------------------

About the topic 'spousal rape' it should be noticed, that even USA is divided on this subject. Only 17 states are considering 'spousal rape' to be same as 'raping a stranger'. It was not considered a crime at all until 1993 - only 14 years ago. 33 states made it a crime, however have different rules for sentences, if the victim was unmarried or married. (as far as I can see from various sources)

'Spousal rape' is a rather new branch of the US-feminist lobby - 50 to 70 percent divorce rate and a huge number of false rape allegations to take financial advantage of 'spousal rape' made feminism a swear-word.

In one posting you compared 'spousal rape' with murder or theft, however murder or theft were already considered to be crimes 2000 years ago, while 'spousal rape' is a new crime creation made by feminists.

Up to now, nobody could explain me, why Thailand should adjust its laws following US-standards. Same with Japan - I really do not see a reason, why Asian countries should import American or European laws. Asian countries are able to make their own laws.

This post has been edited by yohan: 29 January 2007 - 01:01 PM