2006-09-26 10:22:03 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
Not sure about the year but yes he could. Marriage was considered (by the law) to be a woman's consent to sex.
Pretty vile huh.
2006-09-26 10:53:17 · answer #1 · answered by Stygian 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not sure about the date but back in the dark ages (50's or thereabouts) If a wife would not carry out her then called wifely duties a husband could go to court for Restitution of Conjugal rights, or some such. I think that at that time a charge of rape against a husband would seldom be brought as it would have been seen as likely to fail. Glad to say times and views have greatly changed since then.
2006-09-26 12:10:03 · answer #2 · answered by PAUL H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the Rape law is still valid before 1998, im guessing your thinking of the reforms made to the rape law in 1999,2000,2002 and 2005.
It is still legally classed as rape.
2006-09-26 10:24:38 · answer #3 · answered by kombat601 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think anytime the woman says "no" and it happens anyway, it is rape. They have the choice to say yes or no and if NO, the guy should listen, no circumstances, no "she did.....etc" NO is NO. That is also my stand point on pro choice. NO is NO.
2006-09-26 18:06:44 · answer #4 · answered by orion_1812@yahoo.com 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think so...i thought it was 1991 but you may be right... there were rape laws prior to this but no specifics regarding a man and his wife!
2006-09-26 10:25:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The simple answer is yes the date is irrelevant.
2006-09-26 10:23:59 · answer #6 · answered by tucksie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not sure about the year, but it definitely was true at one point.
2006-09-26 10:23:42 · answer #7 · answered by Mr Glenn 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i dont think so - rape is rape
2006-09-26 10:24:03 · answer #8 · answered by Raine 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No
2006-09-26 17:19:02 · answer #9 · answered by tamara.knsley@sbcglobal.net 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think so
2006-09-26 11:28:33 · answer #10 · answered by evening_dewpoint 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋