Ankita/Naren non-consenual relationship - Page 7

Created

Last reply

Replies

64

Views

10.6k

Users

26

Likes

194

Frequent Posters

Laila2009 thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 11 years ago
#61

Originally posted by: nikki1591

Your snide commentary (laugh or sigh at comments) while attempting to seem eductaed is actually laughable. And your lack of knowlede of the different kinds of rape is laughable too.
Let me educate you on the different kinds of rape. Drunken rape in which a person participates in a drunken manner to have sex with a completely sober being is still considered RAPE bc the victim lacked the mental capacity to consent. The sober person took "advantage" of the drunken person. There was no actual PHYSICAL FORCE but CONSENT being the KEYWORD was lacking in this matter. When statutory rape occurs, there is no PHYSICAL FORCE, but the victim being underage is unable to consent. That is RAPE and SEXUAL VIOLENCE of a kind without using actual physical force. The force was a lack of consent. Many rapists have been convicted on this kind of rape. So no, my lack of definition on what constiutes rape is not wrong. I simply don't believe in the backward thingking idea that sexual violence only occurs with actual physical force.
And if he was decieved into believing that his wife is Ahana, then he was decieved into believing that he had sex with Ahana, not Ankita. In fact, my theory is supported by an actual court ruling

http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/cant-have-sex-with-mentallyill-husband-uk-court-rules/1152663/

Even the Indian Penal Code has a section where a mentally ill person cannot consent

Section 90 of the Indian Penal Code, states what cannot be deemed as a valid consent. Consent will not be free if given under fear of injury or misconception of fact or under the unsoundness of mind or in an intoxicated state, or by a child below twelve years of age. The Indian Penal Code under Section 90 includes all mental disorders under unsoundness of mind and as such, the said provision is to protect persons who are mentally challenged from exploitation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tulshidas Kalolkar v. State of Goa[8], included mental retardation' under the expression unsound mind' and observed,
"A mentally challenged girl cannot legally give a consent which would necessarily involve understanding . . . . . . . . . . to have suffered sexual intercourse with consent"

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/consent-of-a-mental-retardee-for-abortion-necessary-485-1.html

The taking advantage of occurs when Ankita allows Naren to believe he is having sex with Ahana, not Ankita. And Ankita was asked to do this is no excuse. If a person ask you jump out the window or cover up a crime, will you do so. And the argument that women cannot rape men has been disproven. It has been proven that erections are an autonomic process as can lubrication for a female during rape, but that does not mean actual consent http://www.bust.com/arousal-during-rape-the-science-behind-why-it-doesnt-equal-consent.html#.U3FmSCjzUnA.
Women can drug men, can take advanatge of his inebriated state. They can overpower him as in this case of a Nigerian man who was gang raped.

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/nigerian-man-dies-after-his-four-wives-rape-him-.aspx?pageID=500&eid=168

And yes, there is such a thing as marital rape and it occurs very much so throughout the Indian continent.
Whether here sexual violence occured is a question we continue to explore but no the rape word wasn't casually tossed around. A lot of thought went into this point. And your point that rape did not occur because no violence was used proves that it is in fact not me who is uneducated and ignorant about the reality of sexual violence.


Have you worked in an rape crisis center or worked in the legal field in any capacity? If not, then you are in position to educate me. I've worked in both areas. Second, finding anecdotal cases to support your theory does not work here.

First and foremost you said the following: Courts have frequently ruled that those with disability, mental issues, and who are beyond comprehension due to intoxication are incapable of consent and in such cases it is not sex that occurs, but rape or sexual violence.

OK, rape and sexual violence - you seriously think Antika did that? She raped him?
Here is the definition of rape: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rape
As you can see here the word they use repeatedly is FORCE. Did Anitaka use force on Naren? Was she physically forceful in making him have sex with her? NO. Therefore it does not constitute as rape. You can scream all you want, that's fine, but you are tragically not rigt here.

Was not Naren coming on to her in the beginning of the show and it was Anitka who put the reigns on him and said to wait 6 months? Wasn't he a willing partner in choosing to have sex with her? Sure she pretended to be someone else; she had no choice in the matter. Child, this is not a clear cut rape case as much as you are making this out to be. It would not stand in a court of law. The fact is Naren is bigger than and he wanted to be intimate with her; if anything you have is deception NOT rape. if he could not consent, what the heck were the family doing getting him married to her and getting them to reside in the same room? If that is the case, then you should charge the whole family as collaborators.

OK, the document you presented is "mentally challenged" - Naren is NOT mentally challenged. Mentally challenged is used when someone has an intellectually disability from birth.

Second, statutory rape, consent is not possible and even with no violence but what makes it rape is the AGE difference. I've dealt with numerous cases of this nature. The force used here is that of an older person taking advantage of another person. It is not the same here.

Third finding an isolated incident and some internet articles to justify women rape men sounds to me that you're not sure what position you have on this issue. You sound like you think you understand what rape is but you appear to be pushing for the idea that women rape men at an equal rate as men rape women.

Keep on screaming on the forum; few, if anyone, agrees with you.

Edited by Laila2009 - 11 years ago
xxxnm thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#62
😆

Originally posted by: Laila2009

Edited by nikki1591 - 11 years ago

Laila2009 thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 11 years ago
#63

Originally posted by: nikki1591

😆

Using capitals in conversation is SCREAMING. You are entitled to believe what Anitka did was rape. I don't and there is more evidence that this would not stand up in a court of law as rape. I really think you need to realize that the issue here - that you lack experience working in the field of rape and trauma, nor have you even worked on any legal cases where rape is involved, I believe that further discussion with you is a mute point.

devashree_h thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#65
This topic was controversial so heated debate was expected. But this topic has now just turned into attack and counter-attack. Most of the points which had to be said have been said. Keeping all this in mind, we have decided to close this topic.

Regards,
Pavitra Rishta DT

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".