OK, so I don't really know how well I'm known here, so I'm a little nervous about tarnishing my good (non-existent) name, but I read something the other day that kind of made me feel a bit uneasy. I couldn't find a news article on the web for it, so I'll run it by you.
The English Courts have made a ruling (which now makes it law) that the starting point for sentencing of a man convicted of raping his wife is now to be the same as that for raping by a stranger - 8 years.
The judge said things like, "rape is rape". He said that if someone is abducted off the street, dragged off, and gang-raped, that this was still "rape", and on par with marital rape. Not only that, he said, but marital rape was even worse, because it involved a breach of trust.
Now, I agree rape is bad. Don't get the wrong idea. But to my mind, those are two very different levels. I've read alot of rape cases, and there are some cases where the couple come home, all hot for each other... they get started... and then the woman decides to go cold, but the man doesn't want to, and is a little more persuasive... the wife gives in to her husband after all... then, bam. Rape. The woman doesn't actually have to raise any forceful objection. We're not necessarily talking about pinning the arms back and going hammer-and-tongs here.
Sometimes a woman changes her mind in the middle of an S&M session and decides she wants out, but the husband thinks it's all part of the game....
At the end of the day, it all depends on the particular facts, but I think that as a rule, those who commit marital rape are not generally such deviant, dangerous member sof society as those who abduct and gang-rape strangers off the street. And it worries me to see that they're being put in the same basket.
So, I'd like to hear what everyone else thnks about this.