The problem is that a married couple is not having enough sex. That’s the problem — not the expectation of sex itself, but the reason why sex is not occurring. The problem is distance between the couple. And it’s THEIR problem, a private matter between the two of them.

So you can take your “rape” hyperbole and stick it where the sun don’t shine. Because what it means for you to invoke that term is jack booted thugs barging into the bedroom and saying, “Is this the man who wanted to get it on with you? Your husband, that is? Come on, buddy. You’re coming with us.”

Butt out! (My humble opinion, of course. :-) )

YOUR DIALOG:
“I am saying that your ideas are wrong because…”

The difference between the two is that “wrong” is defined by the polis, by the social organism, by consensus. The mentality attempts to manipulate social shaming in order to confer value on one’s own perspective.

Regarding methods of dealing with domestic abuse, I prefer “innocent until proven guilty” as an alternative to “apply force before they can break the law.” I also advise people to stay in the home as a way to escape undue coercion and violence based on fabricated allegations. My site exists to highlight a specific problem — false allegations unsupported by objective evidence — and I choose not to cover every angle of domestic abuse. I also choose not to cover the price of tea in China, as much as that would upset tea merchants there. I guess I’m insensitive that way.

As far as using the word rape to describe a man who considers sex to be each spouse’s duty to the other, it most definitely is hyperbolic shaming tactics, and more significantly, it is the pretext to jail someone. In my state, California, the penalty for rape is life in prison. So if it’s rape merely to expect the wife to “do her duty,” if it’s rape merely to have that expectation, then it’s the slammer for the horny spouse. I’m looking at the implications of your cavalier use and expansive definition of the word “rape.” When you throw around that word capriciously — as I contend that ideologues do — you’re justifying the use of jail as a remedy. Guess what? If she’s so upset that her husband wants her, maybe she’s got a problem and not him. And maybe that’s not a matter for public policy either.

A political debate (which this became the moment the word “rape” was injected into the argument) has as its outcome a political policy. The discussion is moot otherwise. I personally believe that it OUGHT to be moot whether a husband expects sex or not, because unless you can charge him with violating the law, what is the point of debating what married people discuss in the privacy of their own bedrooms?

“She just needs a spine.” – This is the same kind of thinking that leads to the dismissing of victims of domestic abuse. “If she really doesn’t like it, she should just grow a spine and leave.” Believe it or not, sometimes things are more complicated than that. We can feel trapped or forced into things without actual violence being used. It can be the threat of violence, or it can be the threat of something else, like “or else I’ll leave you,” “or else I’ll tell your family your secrets,” “or else I will take away these privileges,” “or else I will take the children,” “or else I won’t love you anymore,” etc. There are a whole lot of effective “or elses” that don’t require a single finger lifted.

“What you’re trying to promote is shaming of anyone who would have a different view, desire, feeling, urge, or tendency than that woman.” – Incomprehensibly wrong. There is no shame in wanting sex when your partner doesn’t. The shame is in believing that she HAS to give it to you, whether she wants to or not.

“My view is that a man should not suffer arrest or restraint from accessing his home, simply due to an allegation.” – Which, if the allegation turns out to be true, could put the woman, kids, pets, extended family, etc. in mortal danger. It isn’t uncommon for an abusive man who has been reported to the authorities to then murder his wife (I believe that this may even be one of the top 10 modes of death for women). The authorities have to make a decision – do you wait the months until a trial takes place and risk the death of the woman, or do you separate the family immediately until either the case is withdrawn or the man is found innocent? In the first case, the worst than can happen is the woman and kids are murdered. In the second case, the worst than can happen is the guy is upset, maybe the kids are upset too, and then it’s over.

“the legal system is hostile to accused men, jailing them or violently separating them from their homes even without a jury verdict.” – The legal system is hostile to raped women. The legal system is hostile to parents of both genders if they have been accused by a child. The legal system isn’t perfect. Suggest a solution, by all means, but consider how frequently such cases are found true, the legal system does very little to protect the family, and the wife is murdered. As for violently separating men from their homes, I’m going to assume that this generally happens when they resist arrest. With the exception of a few shocking examples, the police won’t usually become violent unless they perceive you as a serious threat.

“If you consider yourself to be a victim or potential victim, take responsibility for your safety and you adapt, by leaving.” – Says the man who created an entire website dedicated to his victimhood, a man who specifically says that men who feel abused by their wives SHOULD NOT leave their situations. Again, I’m going to quote myself: “things aren’t always that simple.” There’s a whole lot that goes on in abusive relationships. The vast majority of abused women who leave return to their families not because they were just lying for attention, but because things get complicated when your life is entwined with someone else’s – especially when there is abuse going on. Not to mention that if a woman doesn’t resort to the law, she will receive absolutely NO protection if her husband decides to come after her or her children; so “just leave” may well not be an option. In your vision of yourself as a victim, you have completely blinded yourself to the fact that these things are complicated and that the law isn’t specifically designed to take advantage of YOU (but rather, to ensure the protection of those who have been victimized). In most cases, it’s decision is wise. In a few, it isn’t. Nothing is perfect.

“you are basing your argument entirely on the supposed social “not-niceness” of my political views.” – Then you have misconstrued my arguments completely and I can only recommend that you try to read them over. I am not saying that your ideas are wrong because they are “not nice.” I am saying that your ideas are wrong because they put men in a position of power over women’s bodies and completely disregard the feelings and desires of half the population. Your ideas are wrong because, if followed, they lead to the sexual slavery of women. This has absolutely nothing to do with political correctness. It has to do with human decency.

“Just because physical violence may not be used doesn’t make it any less a matter of coercion. “

Just because emotional coercion is used doesn’t make it rape, at least in my book. I don’t have an expansive definition of rape. But ideologues do.

“How is this not an idea of who is right and who is wrong? You say “scenario A is superior” as though it were fact, clearly with the belief that this opinion is right.”

In my opinion, this/that is better/worse. Get it?

“You expressed the idea that a woman HAS to be permanently available to her husband, regardless of her own feelings and desires, and that she is damaging him and their marriage if she doesn’t.”

What is the “or else” behind that “HAS to be?” Because if it’s not violence, then she doesn’t “have to be.” She just needs a spine. What you’re trying to promote is shaming of anyone who would have a different view, desire, feeling, urge, or tendency than that woman. If he wants sex and she doesn’t, regardless of how she feels, he is not a rapist until he uses violence on her. Anything short of violence in order to get sex is simply not rape; that’s how I see it.

“With the underlying assumption that WOMEN lie, that the courts favour the testimonies of women, that wives will resort to such methods whenever they feel miffed, that men in these situations are innocent, etc. Nowhere on your site, that I have seen, have you talked about what happens when abuse does occur, or when false charges are brought against women…”

I think that the way you worded that is telling. The underlying “assumption” was made by you. The underlying implication is that the legal system is hostile to accused men, jailing them or violently separating them from their homes even without a jury verdict. My view is that a man should not suffer arrest or restraint from accessing his home, simply due to an allegation. If you consider yourself to be a victim or potential victim, take responsibility for your safety and you adapt, by leaving. That’s my political view; those are my political values.

By the way, insofar as shaming is concerned, I’m not above shaming someone. You can’t shame me out of shaming. But I myself do not subject my thinking to social approval (at least I try not to). If I tell you that you’re shaming, it’s not to shame you, but rather to point out that you are basing your argument entirely on the supposed social “not-niceness” of my political views. That’s hardly a reasoned position, but your prerogative nonetheless.