The Instigator
sandynsn
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
gmatys
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The question of rape in the bride kidnapping video

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 723 times Debate No: 54304
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

sandynsn

Pro

Sandra Nisanov Phi/Law 310.08
Round 1

Author Patricia Smith makes it clear on what grounds and individual should be convicted of rape and she works beyond basic ideologies to show that rape in fact has occurred in some situations where it would be easy to think otherwise. Patricia Smith provides evidence to show that the kidnapper in the video in fact is guilty of rape. Most importantly she recognizes the distinction between negligence and purposefulness but stands firm that it is quite irrelevant to establish which of the two it is when convicting an individual of rape. She claims as follows:

1)In society both men and women have gotten used to the norms of male aggressiveness and female passivity. (161.5.2)

2)Most cases of rape are complex when no physical injury is inflicted. (160.7.4)

3)Rape is not the only crime where the relationship before the crime took place between the characters is considered by prosecutors in screening the case, but it has yet to be questioned whether or not considering the prior relationship in rape cases is less justifiable or different than considering it in an assault case. (160.2.4)

4)At times there can be a situation where there has been some time elapsed between the force and the intercourse. This situation is never the less threatening even if no explicate threat of harm has been communicated. (167.5.4)

5)Practically all jurisdictions have adopted "force" or "threat of force" grounds to which determined a rape has occurred. (167.5.1)

6)The central role of consent in the law of rape exists to protect a women"s autonomy and a women"s choice in the case of sexual relations. (175.4.1)

7)Women often feel that "in this position many women who say "yes" are not in fact choosing freely but are submitting because they feel a lack of power to say "no"." (177.5.1)

8)Kidnapee states "since I was already taken, they wouldn"t leave me alone anyhow so I knew I have no choice." (27.15)

9)When Bride is asked how she feels at the moment she explains how she wanted to cry earlier but now she is extremely tired. (26.27)

10)"Understandably some men in our society have honestly believed in a different reality of sexual relations and that many may honestly view such situations differently than woman. But it is precisely because men and woman may perceive these situations differently and because the injury to woman stemming from the different male perception may be grave that it is necessary and appropriate for the law to impose a duty upon the men to act with reason and to punish them when they violate that duty." (166.6.2)

11)The conduct a reasonable man should be evaluated by the law as opposed to being influenced by a playboy Macho philosophy which insinuates," no means yes" but by valuing the words of a woman. (161.5.5)

12)"So, too, for threats of harm short of physical injury and for the deception and the false pretenses as methods of seduction. The powerlessness of women and the value of bodily integrity are great enough to argue that women deserve more comprehensive protection for their bodies than the laws of extortion or fraud provide for money." (181.2.1)

13)Through law men have a duty to be alert, keep their eyes open, and be sure of their situation before engaging in sex. A woman must be given credit for knowing that what she speaks is true instead of reading her mind. A blameworthy choice has been made by a man if he has the inherit capacity to act reasonably but fails to do so, which would result directly in the violation of the duty to which he was appointed. Regardless of the fact that negligent acts are less great than the acts imposed by purposeful conduct, being negligently sexually penetrated is still a grand issue. " Being treated like an object whose words or actions are not even worthy of consideration adds insult to the injury." Part of the injury of rape is the dehumanization that ensures the denial of autonomy and dignity; and this can be demonstrated in both purposeful rape and negligent rape. (166.7.2-5)

14)Some feminists have argued that there needs to be a political revolution in order to counteract the traditional approach to rape, which is a failure. Unfortunately in most cases what passes as sex in our society, is in reality coerced. There cannot be any distinction between rape and what occurs in many bedrooms across our country. (161.3.2)

15)"If in 1986 silence does not negate consent, at least crying and saying no should."(161.5.6)

16)A man who claims he thought a woman was consenting, or didn"t bother to think about it should always be compared to what a reasonable man would do in that sort of situation where he would have clearly known that there was no consent present. In this case the negligence of the man who did not bother to think about mistaking the non consent for consent from the woman, should be punishable. (163.6.2)

17)A negligent rapist is still a rapist and should be punished. It is justifiable that knowledge of the risk is sufficient enough to determine blame. (165.5.1-2)

_______________________________________________________________________
18)The kidnapper is guilty of rape.

Although this kidnapper seems to have overcome the female where she feels she has no choice but to go along with his plan; that does not provide legitimate means to prove that he is not guilty of rape.
gmatys

Con

In her article "Rape" Susan Estrich analyzes various cases of rape and identifies certain, ever present, elements that categorize the act of rape in two distinct groups: traditional rape and non-traditional rape. Traditional rape is mainly related to the "use of force" or a clearly articulated "threat of force", where intentions of a perpetrator are unmistakable and there is a definite absence of mistake. Non-traditional rape differs in a way that less force or no force is used, threats are not necessarily articulated and there is a possibility of mistake regarding consent (160.7-161.1). VICE documentary, "Bride Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan", looks more closely at the local Kyrgyzstan tradition of marriage by kidnapping, where a woman is taken off the streets and ultimately convinced to marry her kidnapper. The video follows actions of a young man as he is preparing to kidnap and marry his girlfriend. While there are elements associated with this event which could be interpreted as evidential of rape, certain circumstances surrounding this particular couple structure the following argument in a way that negates an occurrence of rape.

1.) The rape is defined by judging the victim"s response to the act of having sex (162.2.4)
2.) Defining nonconsent is difficult in cases where certain cultures find it proper for female to act nonconsensual when pursued by male, even if she is actually consenting (177.5.2).
3.) The actions of the victim need to completely and beyond a doubt express the lack of consent (164.4.2).
4.) For a charge to be considered a rape it is important to establish that force, a threat of force or manipulation through fear was used in order to perpetrate the act (164.3.1).
5.) For rape charge to be held, it is important to prove perpetrators intent and absence of mistake about consent (163.6.3).
6.) The man has known the woman for a long time and they have both discussed a potential marriage in the future (4 mins-45 secs).
7.) The marriage by kidnapping is a tradition in Kyrgyzstan that allows women to consent to marriage while still remaining "innocent" and not coming off as desperate to marry (16 mins-10 secs).
8.) Getting married by kidnapping could be a part of an agreement between the bride and the groom, where kidnapping part is staged by two parties (23 mins-05 secs).
9.) The woman showed she was capable of physical and verbal resistance (12 mins-33secs) but ceased to resist and express her nonconsent when she was given back her autonomy (15 mins-30 secs).
10.) While having full autonomy and being asked if she is willingly consenting to marriage the woman says "yes" (26 mins-53 secs).
11). It"s customary in Kyrgyzstan to have sex on the wedding night (30 mins-35 secs).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12.) Since the bride willingly consented to marriage, the husband is not guilty of rape.

Determining whether a traditional or non-traditional rape occurred is heavily based on establishing the presence of force or threat of force during or leading up to the act. The victim has to demonstrate clear, unquestionable resistance to taking part in the sexual act, either physically or verbally; or indicate that her consent is obtained through fear, where she believed not cooperating might result in a serious harm to her person. In cases of the traditional rape, where a stranger uses physical strength or weapon to overpower or completely intimidate the victim; uses threats of doing harm if she doesn"t cooperate, and then proceeds to have intercourse with the victim, there is a very little question when it comes to the lack of consent and the resulting crime of rape (160.7.2-3).

The determination becomes inherently more complex when it comes to the issue of non-traditional rape. Unlike the stranger with a weapon example, these cases might involve numerous circumstances where perpetrator and victim might have a mutual history or were engaging in the dating process. For majority of societies, romantic encounters and dating situations are characterized by an aggressive, pursuant behavior from men and passive behavior from women (161.5.2-3).
For many women it is of the utmost importance to maintain an image that they do not easily engage in sexual relations; and even if they are willing to consent to intercourse, they might only communicate their intentions through subtle hints. The decision on the level of aggressiveness required in such cases will fall squarely on the male; and without clear guidance from his partner, it might be up to him to judge what constitutes acceptable behavior and what could be thought of as too forceful. If the female is too passive and unable to express her lack of consent, it is entirely possible that the male acted with an understandable notion that his partner fully consented by letting him take the charge (177.5).

"Bride Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan" could illustrates that exact point. The couple has been romantically involved for some extended amount of time. They discussed the idea of marriage and were both fully aware that marriage by kidnapping is a common tradition in their culture. Union through this type of tradition was even prevalent among their nearest family members, dating couple past generations (27 mins-10 secs). The girl"s mother admitted to actually agreeing to a marriage by kidnapping, which could indicate the physical and verbal resistance during kidnapping was only a part of marriage proceedings and not a manifestation of her lack of consent (23mins -10 secs). That notion seems to be supported by her quick submission, especially after she regained her autonomy (15 mins-30 secs). Not only she stopped any form of resistance, but she seemed to be genuinely smiling while going along with the remaining proceedings. Even when given another chance to demonstrate her nonconsent and unwillingness to marry, the woman says "yes" when asked if she is willingly consenting to marriage. Since she agreed to be married and spend the weeding night with the groom, his actions in the video do not evidence that rape or nontraditional rape occurred.
Debate Round No. 1
sandynsn

Pro

Sandra Nisanov Phi/Law 310.08
Round 2
Your premise number four has proved exactly my point on the undeniable accusation that the kidnapper has performed an act of rape. Your premise goes as follows: for a charge to be considered a rape it is important to establish that force, a threat of force or manipulation through fear was used in order to perpetrate the act (164.3.1) It is exactly through manipulation and fear of force that the kidnapee agreed to the marriage. The bride to be confesses that she did not want to get married at this time and since she was already taken they wouldn't leave her alone anyhow so she had no other choice but to stay and therefore agreed to the marriage. (27.5) This demonstrates the idea that women often feels that "in this position many women who say "yes" are not in fact choosing freely but are submitting because they feel a lack of power to say "no"." (177.5.1) Further more the standard of physical force, or threat of it, to constitute sex as rape give men an easy opportunity to claim that from what they understood; the women gives consent to the act. (164.3.1) This demonstrates clearly that the bride to be had no choice but to say yes and agreed to the marriage on the grounds that she completely lacked power in any other choice. She understood that there is absolutely no other choice therefore her fear to act otherwise was clearly present. "From a woman"s point of view , the danger in this position where women -might in fact find themselves in a situation where they in saying yes really mean no- is that many women who say yes are in fact choosing freely but are submitting because they feel a lack of power to say no." (177.5.1)

Next, your tenth premise can be easily challenged. You have made a claim that "while having full autonomy and being asked if she is willingly consenting to marriage the woman says yes"(26.53) It is absolutely outrageous to somehow make out that this woman in the video was considered of her autonomy in any respect. If her autonomy was respected, first off she would not need to have been kidnapped in order for her to agree to a marriage with this kidnapper. The fact that the actual sex took place after the marriage is completely irrelevant because the sequence of events that led up to that night have stripped this woman completely of her autonomy, therefore leaving her no choice but to follow along with this situation which has consumed her. For the central role of consent, the justification in the law of rape is that it protects a woman"s choice the autonomy of a woman in relations to sex. (175.4.1) Through law men have a duty to be alert, keep their eyes open, and be sure of their situation before engaging in sex. A woman must be given credit for knowing that what she speaks is true instead of reading her mind. A blameworthy choice has been made by a man if he has the inherit capacity to act reasonably but fails to do so, which would result directly in the violation of the duty to which he was appointed. Regardless of the fact that negligent acts are less great than the acts imposed by purposeful conduct, being negligently sexually penetrated is still a grand issue. " Being treated like an object whose words or actions are not even worthy of consideration adds insult to the injury." Part of the injury of rape is the dehumanization that ensures the denial of autonomy and dignity; and this can be demonstrated in both purposeful rape and negligent rape. (166.7.2-5) The following statements which have come directly from the video, reveal that the autonomy of the all the women was not considered in any of the following scenes:

"Father of groom states "Be careful not to let her run away." (2.25)

"While a random bride is being dragged into the apartment she is pleading" she does not want to stay and please let her go" (2.51)

"There was a situation of a man and a woman who were in love, the woman wanted to marry him, but she explicitly explained that she did not want to be kidnapped and didn't want to partake in anything following the kidnapping which and almost all cases consist of consummating the marriage. (3.14)

"After several years of marriage a couple is asked to reflect on the events that brought them together. The husband admits that when he met her he asked whether or not to send his parents for work or should he just kidnapped her right on the spot? and her response was "don't do it" (3.58)

"When the male and all his friends went to retrieve his bride the young man states "you can beat us or even cry" they then proceed while the woman screams out to her mother as she kicks and screams. (12.39)

"Bride confesses that she did not want to get married at this time and since she was already taken they wouldn't leave her alone anyhow so she have no other choice but to stay and agreed to the marriage. (27.5)
gmatys

Con

The main principle regarding the act of rape seems to always be centered on the determination of consent by both parties at the time of the intercourse. Refusal and consistent resistance to being penetrated would be considered as sufficient evidence that a victim did not consent to have sex. But when you state in your second premise that "most cases of rape are complex when no physical injury is inflicted (160.7.4)" we enter a gray area of judgment.

I agree it would be wrong to generalize physical resistance and verbal protest as the only means of nonconsenting. Not every woman is capable of producing the same expressive reaction; there are cases where it is completely plausible that her defensive system would just simply shut down and she would be rendered helpless, unable to move or protest. That situation would definitely have characteristics of a non-traditional rape; if there are obvious indicators of force or threats of force that would cause the paralyzing fear.

What non-traditional rape standard often is unclear about and what it fails to produce is a distinctive criterion of nonconsent. Your premise of "nontraditional rape being quite similar to what happens in many bedrooms across America (161.4.1)" seems to reflect that very notion. If all sex is coerced in some way (161.3.1); the line between consensual and forced sex can be unknowingly crossed at any point, and lack of consent is not properly communicated, is it not possible that cases of mistaken consent could be a regular occurrence?

No two people are the same, so experiences with a certain similar group of people might be our only guide about typical behavior related to that group. It is possible that a man has repeated certain type of seductive behavior with a number of women and was never made aware by any of them that his actions went too far. At that point it is possible that he has determined certain aggressive behavior as acceptable.

In "Rape" Susan Estrich uses an example of Pat and Rusk. Pat is a young woman who met Rusk at a bar and later gave him a ride home. At one point, when she declined twice to go up, he took her car keys and she followed him to his apartment. The two proceeded to have sex. While Rusk"s action to grab car keys might seem to be excessively forceful and without a doubt surprised Pat, at no point in his room did he say or indicate that any harm would be done to her if she doesn"t cooperate with his wishes. His controlling demeanor and aggressive tone caused Pat to assume and articulate possible negative consequences of nonconsenting, without there really being any evidence that would suggest possibilities of bodily harm. His decision to walk Pat to her car and ask if they could meet again would further imply that he might have been unaware of any wrongdoing (171.4-172.4).

What Pat and Rusk example demonstrates is how difficult it is to determine intentions in a non-traditional rape; and how any situations, depending on each party"s position, can be a subject to different interpretations. In bride kidnapping the only real use of physical force occurs during the kidnapping itself (12min30secs-15mins40secs). Assuming the resistance is not a preplanned part of the wedding proceedings, this is the only time that the woman"s freedom is restricted and her pleas are ignored. After the bride regains her autonomy, she seems to make a conscious decision to continue the marriage ceremonies.

Since the kidnapping is the only means of physical force that was used, it seems safe to assert that physical force or threat of physical force was not a factor in the women"s decision to marry. Therefore it is important to examine whether psychological manipulation or fear was a decisive element in the bride"s decision. Unlike the woman in "Rape", who"s unfamiliarity of the man and her surroundings led to her consenting out of fear, the bride in the video has known the groom for some extended time and was romantically involved with him (4mins 40 secs). She was fully aware that she will not experience any harm if she does not agree to marry and the video indicates that her family was aware of her location.

As it seems unlikely that fear of being harmed was a contributing factor, we can assess whether the mental distress she experienced would be sufficient to qualify the grooms actions as an act of rape. I do agree that other examples of bride kidnapping could evidence rape. When a woman is taken off the streets by a stranger and subjected to extended process of being convinced to marry, it is not difficult to imagine her consent being obtained as a result of severe mental distress.

The bride in the video, after the initial vigorous resistance, just seems to give in way too easy; and only moments after she was given her freedom back. When you reference that kidnapee states "since I was already taken, they wouldn"t leave me alone anyhow so I knew I have no choice (27.15)", I find it hard to believe that no other alternatives were available in this situation. There is no evidence she even considered or discussed other choices and, like you stated in your argument when you wrote: Women often feel that "in this position many women who say "yes" are not in fact choosing freely but are submitting because they feel a lack of power to say "no"." (177.5.1).

Additionally, your claim that "she understood that there is absolutely no other choice therefore her fear to act otherwise was clearly present" is completely subjective as far as determining the presence of a choice inhibiting fear. Her assumed resignation to her fate should more likely be attributed to her upbringing in Kyrgyzstan, rather than fear of any repercussions as a result of saying "No". She was more likely brought up with an instilled knowledge that in a situation like this, its proper for her to eventually agree since it is a part of a long lasting tradition (27mins09secs).
Debate Round No. 2
sandynsn

Pro

Sandra Nisanov Phi/Law 310.08
Round 3
The following claims that you have made directly prove my argument. "I agree it would be wrong to generalize physical resistance and verbal protest as the only means of non - consenting. Not every woman is capable of producing the same expressive reaction; there are cases where it is completely plausible that her defensive system would just simply shut down and she would be rendered helpless, unable to move or protest. That situation would definitely have characteristics of a non-traditional rape; if there are obvious indicators of force or threats of force that would cause the paralyzing fear." and "As it seems unlikely that fear of being harmed was a contributing factor, we can assess whether the mental distress she experienced would be sufficient to qualify the grooms actions as an act of rape. I do agree that other examples of bride kidnapping could evidence rape. When a woman is taken off the streets by a stranger and subjected to extended process of being convinced to marry, it is not difficult to imagine her consent being obtained as a result of severe mental distress." It is exactly statements such as these that show the bride was pressured so severely that her mindset transformed into the idea that if she agrees; what follows would be the termination of the pressure and convincing from all of the woman that have surrounded her. Furthermore she understood through her tradition that these events of convincing can take minutes, hours, or even days, so it has been established that these convincing ceremonies could be endless. A man often times believes and practices that when some women say no , all they have to do is pressure them in a proper manner and it would result in her saying yes or in the least go along with that same act she never wanted to have any part in. ( 177.5.2)

The following claim that you have made is irrelevant because the "amount of time" need not be specified in order to constitute grounds of rape. "The main issue I have with this argument is that it doesn"t specify what time frame is necessary between the use of force and the actual intercourse. Plus, it doesn"t establish a set of circumstances required for the force to be interpreted as a key component in perpetuating the act of rape. In a hypothetical case where a man forcefully kidnaps a woman, holds her captive for an extended time, during which he slowly breaks her physically and emotionally to the point that when they actually have sex she is no longer resisting, I could see a direct correlation between the use of force on that first day and eventual submission of the captured woman. So even though, at the time of the intercourse, force was no longer present, the initial force used during the kidnapping was critical in the process that led to sex. " It is legitimate to punish the man who chooses to ignore explicitly the words of protestation coming from that woman. With quite certainty if is safe and necessary to say that "many women who say yes " whether on dates or on the job " would say no if they could ; I have no doubt that women"s silence is sometimes the product not of passion and desire , but of pressure and pain." (181.1.1-2) Most importantly the amount of time that has passed between the kidnapping and the actual act of intercourse; is not basis to exculpate the kidnapper. At times there can be a situation where there has been some time elapsed between the force and the intercourse. This situation is never the less threatening even if no explicate threat of harm has been communicated. (167.5.4)
gmatys

Con

When you wrote: "Kidnapper states "yes we are breaking the law but everybody here understands that it is our tradition and you can"t change it." (3.37) I believe you are mistaken about what part of the law the kidnapper was referencing. While it"s true that kidnappers were aware that their actions were against the law, the breaking of the law discussed in the video is almost directly pertaining to the act of the kidnapping itself. They admit that taking someone off the street by force is wrong. What I don"t necessarily see in your premise is how kidnapping on its own can be linked to the occurrence of rape. It"s unlikely that they believed that their actions are contributing to the girl being eventually raped and most likely they were convinced they were simply following the tradition. The best man even states that if they were stopped by the police, they simply would have clarified that kidnapping was part of a wedding party, and that would most likely suffice as an explanation (20 mins-20 secs).

Your claim: "At times there can be a situation where there has been some time elapsed between the force and the intercourse. This situation is never the less threatening even if no explicate threat of harm has been communicated. (167.5.4)" has some determination problems as well. The main issue I have with this argument is that it doesn"t specify what time frame is necessary between the use of force and the actual intercourse. Plus, it doesn"t establish a set of circumstances required for the force to be interpreted as a key component in perpetuating the act of rape. In a hypothetical case where a man forcefully kidnaps a woman, holds her captive for an extended time, during which he slowly breaks her physically and emotionally to the point that when they actually have sex she is no longer resisting, I could see a direct correlation between the use of force on that first day and eventual submission of the captured woman. So even though, at the time of the intercourse, force was no longer present, the initial force used during the kidnapping was critical in the process that led to sex.

I fail to see how the time interval between kidnapping of the bride in the video and her eventual decision to consent is conducive to her consenting to marriage and sex. At the time of consent during the wedding ceremony, the use of force during kidnapping seems already irrelevant in her decision making. When she says "yes" to marriage, she already has full autonomy and is undeniably aware that she can say "no" without any fear of harm being done to her. It is possible that, in the situation when she does not consent, the process of convincing her to marry could perhaps go on for days (15 mins-00 secs). In that case, mental and physical fatigue could be a contributing factor in obtaining consent and initial use of force during kidnapping could be linked to eventual sex. That though, has not taken place in the video.

I do see problems with this claim as well: "A man often times believes and practices that when some women say no , all they have to do is pressure them in a proper manner and it would result in her saying yes or in the least go along with that same act she never wanted to have any part in. ( 177.5.2) ". Only in the recent years and mainly in the western cultures, the dating practice of aggressive male and passive female has been slowly phased out and replaced by more equal approach of two confident in their wants and desires adults meeting up for romantic purposes. Diminished focus on social stigmas related to dating and increased urbanization to big cities, where negative reputation and notoriety is less significant than in small villages or cities, greatly contributed to women in these cultures no longer feeling an obligation to play the role of a passive female at the risk of any public shaming. In these modern cultures women can properly articulate their feelings and "no" means "yes" philosophy is less likely to be practiced.

Circumstances above definitely do not apply to the case in the video. The location in Kyrgyzstan is a very rural area and showcased society seems to follow old fashion, patriarchal way of thinking when it comes to gender roles and what behavior is appropriate for women. The "no" means "yes" philosophy is very much relied on in male/female relations. It is explained that answer "No" is associated with female purity and innocence, while saying "Yes" will be identified with negatively perceived characteristic of being desperate to get married (16 mins-15 secs). A lot of importance is being placed on the idea of purity for women, as evidenced by public display symbolizing girl"s virginity on her wedding night (30 mins-30 secs). If we additionally consider that bride"s mother actually agreed to be married by kidnapping, meaning her resistance and protest was most likely a staged performance, it is virtually impossible to determine if this is a case of "No" means "No" or not (23mins-05 secs).
Debate Round No. 3
sandynsn

Pro

Sandra Nisanov Phi/Law 310.08
Round 4

When you say this: "Only in the recent years and mainly in the western cultures, the dating practice of aggressive male and passive female has been slowly phased out and replaced by more equal approach of two confident in their wants and desires adults meeting up for romantic purposes. Diminished focus on social stigmas related to dating and increased urbanization to big cities, where negative reputation and notoriety is less significant than in small villages or cities, greatly contributed to women in these cultures no longer feeling an obligation to play the role of a passive female at the risk of any public shaming. In these modern cultures women can properly articulate their feelings and "no" means "yes" philosophy is less likely to be practiced. Circumstances above definitely do not apply to the case in the video. The location in Kyrgyzstan is a very rural area and showcased society seems to follow old fashion, patriarchal way of thinking when it comes to gender roles and what behavior is appropriate for women. The "no" means "yes" philosophy is very much relied on in male/female relations. It is explained that answer "No" is associated with female purity and innocence, while saying "Yes" will be identified with negatively perceived characteristic of being desperate to get married (16 mins-15 secs). A lot of importance is being placed on the idea of purity for women, as evidenced by public display symbolizing girl"s virginity on her wedding night (30 mins-30 secs). If we additionally consider that bride"s mother actually agreed to be married by kidnapping, meaning her resistance and protest was most likely a staged performance, it is virtually impossible to determine if this is a case of "No" means "No" or not (23mins-05 secs)." you are further proving my point as to why the law should address all areas as well as all individuals with the same respect. The fact that we as a society or culture are a bit more progressive here in the United States is irrelevant because there have been at least one or more instances where rape has occurred even in today's society where the location is a progressive region in the United States. The law cannot protect a man just because his traditions are different. The fact that this rape has not taken place in the United States is irrelevant because the acts that this man committed are grounds to determine a rape has taken place no matter what region you are from. Because of the traditions there, the society is more patriarchal therefore often times favoring the men in the criminal law. This does not necessarily mean that rape has not taken place."Most of the time, a criminal law that reflects male views and male standards imposes its judgment on men who have injured other men. It is boys rules applied to a boys fight. In rape the male standard defines a crime committed against woman, and the male standards are used not only to judge men but also to judge the conduct of woman victims. Moreover, because the crime involves sex itself, the law of rape inevitably threads on the explosive ground of sex roles, of male aggression and female passivity, of our understandings of sexuality " areas where differences between male and female perspective may be most pronounced." (160.4.4-7) Rape cases almost entirely disregard the defendant, and focus on the behavior of the victim, which is based on a male standard of what is appropriate behavior of a woman. (162.2-3) "The study of rape as an illustration of sexism in the criminal law also raises broader questions about the way conceptions of gender and the different backgrounds and perspectives of man and woman are encompassed within the criminal law." (160.4.1)
So to make it clear what constitutes as rape cannot be different in one country then it is in another. The law must recognize rape and what constitutes as a whole. If one individual murders another one what follows is necessary punishment regardless of what region you are from. The same concept should be applied to rape. One cannot be punished differently or not even accused of a crime which would have different circumstances in the for example the United States or any other progressive region. The conduct of a reasonable man should be evaluated by the law as opposed to being influenced by a playboy Macho philosophy which insinuates," no means yes" but by valuing the words of a woman. (161.5.5) A man who claims he thought a woman was consenting, or didn"t bother to think about it should always be compared to what a reasonable man would do in that sort of situation where he would have clearly known that there was no consent present. In this case the negligence of the man who did not bother to think about mistaking the non consent for consent from the woman, should be punishable. (163.6.2)
gmatys

Con

When you state that "The fact that we as a society or culture are a bit more progressive here in the United States is irrelevant because there have been at least one or more instances where rape has occurred even in today's society where the location is a progressive region in the United States. The law cannot protect a man just because his traditions are different. The fact that this rape has not taken place in the United States is irrelevant because the acts that this man committed are grounds to determine a rape has taken place no matter what region you are from" I believe you are missing the main point of my previous argument. The fact that rape occurs not only in the United States, but all over the world does not make the cultural importance of "No" means "Yes" philosophy in Kyrgyzstan irrelevant. I will argue that cultural connotations of that philosophy are directly relevant to the marriage by kidnapping tradition. The importance of local culture and tradition are the basis for judgment not only for the kidnapper, but also for the victim.

It would be absolutely ignorant and culturally elitist to interpreted actions described in the video only from the viewpoint of an outside observer, where interpretations of the events are made strictly using one"s own personal culture as comparison basis. While a person in United States might view the tradition of "Bride Kidnapping" as an unquestionable crime of rape, the culturally relevant observer might see that event as simply an everyday typical occurrence, socially valuable to Kyrgyzstan culture. Your claim that "the law cannot protect a man because his traditions are different" only applies when that tradition is not under the jurisdiction of that law. Indeed, the U.S law would not protect a bride kidnapper if he committed the act on U.S territory. You can"t use the term "law" as something that has the exact universal meaning all over the world, because it obviously does not. What constitutes as punishment for theft in U.S might not even remotely be similar to type of punishment for the same act in other parts of the world.

So when you again state: "So to make it clear what constitutes as rape cannot be different in one country then it is in another. The law must recognize rape and what constitutes it as a whole" I feel you once more elected to rely on law standards not relevant to Kyrgyzstan and imposed law and social ideology discussed by Estrich, which mainly focuses on U.S law. Neither the groom nor the bride in the video is living under that set of law. The bride at no point in the video indicates that the actions taken by the groom was a violation of her person and she eventually accepts the events that unfolded as a natural occurrence, a part of her nation"s tradition. She is initially upset for the way she was taken but that initial struggle is quickly replaced by realization that she is participating in that tradition, at which point she is willingly accepting the notion of getting married (27mins09 secs).

In conclusion, I believe it is unreasonable to judge the young men in the video as a person who committed an act of rape. The use of force illustrated in the video and demonstrative lack of consent by the kidnapped woman was no longer relevant at the moment when the bride willingly agreed to become his wife. Even the initial harm done to her during the process of kidnapping was eventually interpreted by her as way of following the local tradition. The required in the crime of rape guilty intent was not present at any point during the act, from the moment of kidnapping to the wedding ceremony; everyone involved, including the bride, believed that following the tradition absolved him from anything that could be judged as intentional wrongdoing. If an argument could be made here, it is for the abandonment of the tradition itself on the moral basis, but the actions taken by the groom in the video do not evidence that a Rape of nontraditional rape occurred.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.