I am heartened that the government of The Bahamas has finally proposed legislation to ban marital rape. After all, according to a 2006 United Nations report, marital rape is already a crime in over 104 countries, including Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago; not to mention being a crime under international law.
Yet this proposed legislation has incited such widespread moral outrage, one might think Bahamians are living in a Taliban paradise. Indeed, this condemnation exposes the fact that Christian fundamentalists, in many respects, are every bit as fanatical as Islamic fundamentalists.
Of course, much violence has been visited upon women in the name of Christianity. And none has been more insidious than marital rape sanctioned by the misogynistic edict that a woman must always obey her husband’s sexual commands … unconditionally.
But what is so troubling about this edict is the number of women who seem so willing to abide by it. Here, for example, is a quote from a Nassau Guardian report on a panel discussion that was held on this proposed legislation earlier this week:
The discussion became animated at several points with activist Rodney Moncur calling Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham “the devil” for seeking to make the marital rape ban law. He characterized the amendment as an assault on traditional Christian family values.
Another woman, who did not provide her identity while speaking, said that it is not possible for a man to rape his wife. She said that she makes herself available to her husband whenever he desires sex, claiming that her body is ‘his body’.
This is why I applaud Opposition Senate leader Allyson Maynard-Gibson for calling on the government to conduct proper consultations:
After the consultation, we should pass the legislation necessary to implement the proposals … and properly fund the institutions necessary for the legislation to be effective… A debate in this context enables a full and complete discussion of the problems and the solutions in relation to domestic violence specifically and support of the family generally.
Except that Senator Maynard-Gibson is probably too politically correct to say that, in addition to consultation with experts, the government should hold public forums, not to debate the merits of this legislation but to impart information about it.
Because opposition to this proposed ban on marital rape is being stirred up primarily by religious leaders. And these are invariably men who proselytize the doctrinaire belief that a man has a God-given right to have sex with his wife whenever he wants it … even against her will.
Therefore, if the aim of public debate is to reason with those who oppose this legislation, then it will never be enacted.
Accordingly, I implore political leaders to ignore the blandishments of religious leaders who not only condone but actually champion marital rape – based on their reading of the Bible and their chauvinistic concept of traditional family values. I rather suspect, though, that self-preservation would preclude these religious leaders from supporting legislation calling for all adulterers to be put to death – as the Bible commands….
To be fair, however, I should note that there are progressive religious leaders in The Bahamas. And I duly entreat them to lend their voices to this debate by preaching the gospel, especially to women, that sexual abuse in marriage is as much of an abomination against God as physical abuse.
In any event, no religious indoctrination or social conditioning can deny the self-evident truth that a woman’s right to determine whether or NOT to have marital sex is as fundamental as her right to determine whom to marry in the first place.
And, for the record, it is patent nonsense to suggest that marital rape can only occur in marriages that are “on the rocks.” For nonconsensual sex, even in purportedly good marriages, is also rape.
That said, as an attorney, I would be remiss not to acknowledge the difficulties inherent in prosecuting those accused of marital rape, including the spectre of false accusations. Indeed, I am mindful that even charges stemming from the “he said, she said” dynamic of date rape are often impossible to prove – given the vagaries of consent and post-coital remorse.
But these difficulties can be dealt with by examining the facts and circumstances of each case. More to the point, they should not be an impediment to the enactment of this legislation since its purpose should be more to deter marital rape than to punish it.
Related commentaries:
Afghanistan legalizes marital rape
“Brokeback Mountain” banned in The Bahamas
Rodney M says
Dear Anthony Hall,
For the record I do not support a man or woman forcing one another to have sex. The reason being, God created sex as an act of pleasure to be enjoyed by married couples. He created marriage. WITHOUT THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIGE there would be no sex in the first place according to God. Hence I disagree with your opinon that “a woman’s right to determine whether or NOT to have marital sex is as fundamental as her right to determine whom to marry in the first place” simply because while a woman has a fundamental right to choose whom to marry because it is her legal and God given right she does not have a similar fundamental right to choose to have sex with her husband which was created by God, and he gave the authorisation for it to be used in marriage and his word determine that no partner have the right to refuse one another sex. Hence if the CREATOR of SEX and MARRIAGE has estabished this foundation it is wrong for you to suggest that “No religious indoctrining can deny”.
I will emphatically disapprove of any partner forcing themself on the other to the point of battery or forceable sex because God never intended for sex to occur in that way. God is love and that same kind of love was designed to be expressed in the act of sex which is consensual. Hence my my point is simply rape is forcing one’s self on another sexually according to man’s law and God’s law which was established before Man’s law suggeested that both parties have the right to each others body. The bible must be the standard here because it is where marrigage was first created and approved and the rules laid down. My concern with the Bahamas passing a marital rape act is not to protect a husband who batters his wife sexually or puts her at risk after his scheming ways but to protect the husband from his God given right to have sex and not be falsely accued of rape where a wife may have a hidden agenda to get him locked up so she can have her free will. The law in your scenario would be one sided and needs to be tweaked for fairness before we can consider taking this any further.