Sexuelle Handlungen mit der Ehefrau, einschließlich oraler oder analer Handlungen, keine Vergewaltigung, keine Zustimmung erforderlich: Madhya Pradesh HC

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/sexual-acts-with-wife-including-oral-or-anal-not-a-rape-consent-not-needed-madhya-pradesh-hc/articleshow/109832866.cms?from=mdr

37 comments

  1. here is how you end this….since consent isnt needed, every woman should peg their man, every time. Just hammer away at their ass….I bet at least fifty percent of the men want the law changed.
    The Other fifty, just want more lube.

  2. Sounds like biting his dick off is not illegal and doesn’t require consent.

  4. These decisions are made by the intellectuals of the country.

  9. So basically, if you’re a woman who gets married, you are now that man’s sex slave. Jesus christ

  10. Marriage isn’t offering any advantages, so why would women even bother 

  12. India reinforcing what everyone already thinks about its treatment of women.

  14. Very expected thing to do from india, wtf is wrong with them?? 

    All woman including the young and old should leave that place so that all men left there will fuck each other lmao

  15. INAL.

    I have a feeling that this decision is solely based on an outdated, existing legislation or legal tradition. I think that the parliament of India should repeal such out of touch laws and introduce more modern laws.

    I have seen similar legal thinking in the laws of Sri Lanka where a married couple, for sexual pleasure, is considered slaves of each other. I think this is based on Roman-Dutch law which governs most of the civil laws in the country. Under such a system, each party is considered to have a right to have sex with their partner. Outdated of course.

  18. >When rape includes insertion of penis in the mouth, ***urethra*** or anus of a woman and if that act is committed with his wife, not below the age of 15 years, then consent of the wife becomes immaterial

    Urethra?!

    That had better be just a translation error.

  20. This really doesn’t improve India’s infamous reputation with regard to sexual crimes. I’m glad my parents got out of there forty years ago.

  22. I’m sorry but do these rejects think bodily autonomy stops with marriage? That rights of the individual no longer exist?

  23. “When rape includes insertion of penis in the mouth, urethra or anus of a woman”

    “Urethra”? what kind of anatomy indians have?

  26. Cases 999 that India has extremely outdated laws. 

    Fun fact, if you have sex with someone before marriage and than they don’t marry you, it is legally considered rape. You can file a case and get that person a life sentence. 

  27. Not surprising, America only changed that law about 30 years ago.

  28. Another example of why India will ALWAYS be a third world country

  29. If only it wasn’t also a country where women get wedded against their will.

  30. > consent not needed

    Yeah sorry bro, that’s never the case

  31. “Urethra” no way it is not a translation error, that just doesn’t make sense, or someone has to be too evil to say that shit.

  32. I wish I could block all Indian news. It’s either disgusting, shockingly stupid, or shocking disgusting and stupid

  33. Oh no. Those poor women. It will be interesting to see if marriage rates plummet as I would hope and expect from draconian measures like this.

  36. India sounds like an awful place. What a crappy culture for women.

  37. Best metric: Would they allow their daughter to experience that? If the answer is anything other than a resounding yes, then it’s a no. That no is as much logical as it should be subjective. 

    The pain a man feels from sexual frustration or rejection/non-desire is much smaller than the scar left from being forced to be intimate if the desire is not there. 

    Fuck this

Leave a Reply