Whoops!! I just reviewed the thread linked in muldoonthief’s post, and I see that I posted in there that the story of the wife trying to get pregnant was from an episode of ER. Sorry about that.
You could even make a movie about it! Set in East Germany, that is, and on a shorter timeline: Good Bye, Lenin! - Wikipedia
I know, but we’re not talking about England in the 1400s, or even Iran 20 years ago. I guess I just assumed that we were talking about modern, western nations. Countries where the health care would be advanced enough for someone to be in a coma for any prolonged period of time and be able to deliver a healthy baby while in that coma.
While spousal rape isn’t recognized everywhere, it is recognized in most industrial nations. Even if it isn’t a provision on the books specifically detailing what spousal rape is, most jurisdictions can and will prosecute him under the rape statutes. If he is forcing intercourse on her and she doesn’t consent, that’s rape, regardless if it’s his wife, a total stranger, or a prostitute. It’s rape. And if her family made a case that he raped her, etc., the district attorney would have to at least give the case a serious look, if not prosecute.
Spousal rape wasn’t recognized as a crime in many “modern, western nations” until well into the 20th century. Quite possibly it’s still not recognized as a crime in some of them.
I know some women who would be more likely to become pregnant when in a coma than if they were conscious.
I understand that. I was exaggerating the time frame to make a point. The word “modern” means, “of or pertaining to present and recent time; not ancient or remote.” That pretty much means “now.” I’m not talking about 20 years ago, or even 5 years ago. I’m talking about western nations (where women have rights) today.
And the second paragraph of my post addresses that in most industrial nations it is a crime, but not all. Each and every state of the United States considers it illegal. I am aware that not every country sees it as a crime. But here are a few countries that do. Argentina, Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belize, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Ecuador, England, the Fiji Islands, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Honduras, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Macedonia, Mexico, Namibia, Nepal, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, The Philippines, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Taiwan, Trinidad/Tobago, the United States, Uzbekistan, and Zimbabwe. If you still don’t believe me, check out each and every one of their US State Department Country Human Rights Reports. And I may have missed some when I was going through the reports.
You know, with something as serious and harmful as spousal rape, I never thought I would have so many people arguing against me. Spousal rape is really rape. It saddens me a little that people don’t seem to accept that it happens, it’s wrong, and it’s illegal. (Not just here, but in general.) 
A lot of people still seem to think that once you marry someone, they have access to your body forever. The mere idea of trying to have intercourse with a partner who could not consent, participate, or enjoy it is repugnant to me, but I seem to be in a minority. Apparently using your comatose spouse’s body is just fine and dandy to most people. It’s wrong, no matter whether the spouse is a wife or a husband.
Who here has argued that spousal rape isn’t rape, or that it doesn’t happen, or that it’s not wrong? As far as I can tell the only people arguing with you here have been disputing your earlier blanket claim that it is illegal.
I don’t think most people would want to have, or would enjoy having, sex with a comatose partner, even if it were their spouse. We’re debating only the legality of such action.
For the record, though, I can think of a slightly less squicky reason for wanting to have sex with a comatose spouse: imagine a couple who has always been dead-set on having children together, but whose plans therefor were thwarted when one of them became comatose. In such a circumstance perhaps the conscious spouse would elect to have intercourse with their comatose partner solely for the purpose of fulfilling their previously agreed-upon plans.
I think one reason why people may argue against you is that it’s intuitively obvious that sexual relations between married adults-- or even ones in a committed relationship-- operate under very different assumptions than this, practically speaking.
No means no. No one this side of Roman Polanski’s friends can argue otherwise.
But who here asks their wife, husband, girlfriend, boyfriend for permission to have sex with them? Who here thinks that this is the practical standard on which “rape” is avoided?
If the definition of rape is “any instance you have sex without receiving a verbal affirmative to proceed,” than I would assume that millions of men and women are rapists. I hope you would agree that this standard is absurd.
Is there ever a possibility of “implied consent”? Legally, perhaps not; perhaps the law should say no, if only to prevent actual rapists from using such an argument. But practically speaking, OF COURSE there is such a thing as implied consent, insofar as long as there isn’t a “no,” a “yes” isn’t necessary.
If not, then I best not wake up my GF for nookie ever again without giving her a copy of Antioch College’s code of conduct.
And none of this brings into the discussion a consensual “rape fantasy,” which introduces a whole 'nother can of worms.
Anyway, to bring it back to the coma patient-- laws differ, but I would argue that it is rape, only because the spouse is unable to say yes or no.
Is sex with a brain dead woman rape or necrophilia?
My claim was that in most modern western nations, spousal rape is a crime. I subsequently proved that. And I still have people arguing with me that it’s not a crime. It saddens me that people would even think spousal rape isn’t a crime. That they felt the need to justify it by poking holes in this argument where there aren’t holes to be poked. (It wasn’t illegal 20 years ago. It’s not illegal in developing nations., etc. Yeah, I got that. I never said it wasn’t illegal in those contexts.) If you’re gonna try to justify something as awful as rape, do so with a real argument.
Better yet, don’t try to justify rape… :smack:
Curious, I called a local long term care facility. Heck, they won’t even allow their charges to date, let along get pregnant.
Let’s look at it from another angle. Could a typical (if there is such a thing) comatose male be stimulated by his wife such that she could then have sexual intercourse with him? It depends on the cause of the coma, I suppose. Would an erection and ejaculation be an involuntary response for most such men?
Well, electroejaculators are used to collect sperm from men who have spinal cord damage that would otherwise prevent sexual function, so I suppose they could also be used on the comatose, if ordinary stimulation doesn’t. It would almost certainly require the cooperation of a medical professional, however, unlike the TV show I saw where a woman used one on a man who had been lured to her apartment and given a date-rape drug (for complicated and totally implausible reasons, of course).
From that link:
After proper inspection, a well-lubricated large rectal probe with horizontal electrode plates is introduced gently into the rectal ampulla, and is stabilized against the anterior rectal wall at the level of the seminal vesicles and prostate. Electrostimulation via the rectal probe may then begin…
Yikes! Still, a 90% success rate is nothing to, um, sneeze at.